Re: ecpg and bison again

Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> > On Tue, Jun 18, 2002 at 04:41:57PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> > How about we add the preproc.c file generated by bison 1.49 to cvs?
> > Could that create problems elsewhere?
> >>
> >> Yes. It's a bad idea to put derived files in CVS. For one thing,
> >> CVS will not guarantee that their timestamps are right compared to
> >> the master file.
>
> > Actually I thought about changing the makefile as well, so preproc.c
> > does not look like a derived file anymore.
>
> That cure would be FAR worse than the disease. Leave it be.
>
> The time for panic will be in August, if we are ready to make a beta
> release and there's still no bison release. In the meantime I really
> don't see why you can't keep updating your copy of preproc.y and
> just not commit it...

I think it is fine to add a bison C file to CVS until we get bison
updated, and Michael can control that. We can always remove it later.
Is the problem that they C file will not have the proper timestamp?

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026