Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mlcgX-0004w0-4H for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 19:58:05 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mlcgT-00012j-8a for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 19:58:01 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mlcgS-00012U-Vq for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 19:58:00 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mlcgQ-0005fd-KI for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 19:58:00 +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 1ACJvubf1847700; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 14:57:56 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: "Bossart, Nathan" cc: "pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org" Subject: Re: Improving psql's \password command In-reply-to: References: <747443.1635536754@sss.pgh.pa.us> <765509.1635552418@sss.pgh.pa.us> <7BAC8A28-148B-4B03-A345-D68071388300@amazon.com> <1553329.1636647111@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to "Bossart, Nathan" message dated "Fri, 12 Nov 2021 17:23:58 +0000" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1847698.1636747076.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2021 14:57:56 -0500 Message-ID: <1847699.1636747076@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk "Bossart, Nathan" writes: > I haven't started on the SIGINT stuff yet, but I did extract the > PQuser() fix so that we can hopefully get that one out of the way. I > made some small adjustments in an attempt to keep the branching in > this function from getting too complicated. Right, it makes sense to consider just this much as the back-patchable part, and leave the more complicated messing with simple_prompt() for HEAD only. I made a couple further cosmetic tweaks and pushed it. regards, tom lane