From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
cc: Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: System views for versions reporting
In-reply-to: <e4eb427c-0aea-4821-8940-eb5d949233dd@joeconway.com>
References: <vximpev4vsyqvzvjn3qxb2apltuaxw7j4uxc4lggyjh3ejjbzx@66clgfgm6vlk> <e4eb427c-0aea-4821-8940-eb5d949233dd@joeconway.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
	message dated "Sun, 06 Oct 2024 12:01:29 -0400"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <1350452.1728231407.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 2024 12:16:47 -0400
Message-ID: <1350453.1728231407@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1350453.1728231407%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> writes:
> I think it would be nice to include a sha256 hash (or something similar) 
> of the libraries as well, so that they can be checked against known good 
> values.

That seems well outside the charter of this patch.  Also, how would
we even get that information?  A typical application doesn't know
exactly what libraries it's linked with or where they came from on
the filesystem.  Maybe one could find that out with sufficient
platform-specific hackery, but I don't believe we could do it
portably.

			regards, tom lane