Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1uZa8Q-005T0G-BN for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 09 Jul 2025 19:07:14 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1uZa8O-003ABD-DF for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 09 Jul 2025 19:07:13 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1uZa8O-003AB5-2o for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 09 Jul 2025 19:07:12 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([68.162.161.243]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1uZa8M-006i7i-1Q for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Wed, 09 Jul 2025 19:07:12 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 569J77b61338491; Wed, 9 Jul 2025 15:07:07 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Jacob Champion cc: Ivan Kush , PostgreSQL Hackers , lev.nikolaev@tantorlabs.com Subject: Re: [PoC] Federated Authn/z with OAUTHBEARER In-reply-to: References: <83C44AB4-24B0-437F-B139-B5CBC5821BB1@yesql.se> <32e5741d-3dc8-4b15-8c56-cfb26483563c@tantorlabs.com> <1328170.1752082586@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1331938.1752084788@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Jacob Champion message dated "Wed, 09 Jul 2025 11:39:41 -0700" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1338489.1752088027.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2025 15:07:07 -0400 Message-ID: <1338490.1752088027@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Jacob Champion writes: > Here is a draft patch for Ivan's reported issue; I still need to put > it through its paces with some more unusual setups, but I want to get > cfbot on it. I'm confused about why this moves up the temporary changes of CPPFLAGS and LDFLAGS, but not LIBS? Maybe that's actually correct, but it looks strange (and perhaps deserves a comment about why). regards, tom lane