Re: SuSE RPMs available for PostgreSQL 7.4

From: Lamar Owen <lowen(at)pari(dot)edu>
To: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: SuSE RPMs available for PostgreSQL 7.4
Date: 2003-11-19 19:03:08
Message-ID: 200311191403.08081.lowen@pari.edu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Wednesday 19 November 2003 01:43 pm, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Nov 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > So why don't you do
> >
> > binary/redhat/
> > SRPMS
> > fedora-this
> > redhat-that

> peter and I agree *sooooo* often, but I do agree with him on this one ...
> I'd love to see someone submit binaries for, say, the various version of
> solaris, and the current dir hierachy doesn't seem to 'flow' for doing
> multiple OS distributions ...

That would work, except for the fact the the RPM's are not just for Red Hat.
But, if the consensus of the list is to do it this way, then I'll maintain a
symlink structure (to keep from wasting space) that will implement this. Is
this what the users want?

> As lamar says, Solaris can do rpm's, but why, when it has pkg_add ...

If a user has gone to the trouble to install RPM on Solaris, that that user is
probably going to want to use an RPM.

In the case of FreeBSD, isn't it the preference to use the ports system?

In the case of Debian, Oliver maintains his package inside of the Debian
system, and not on ftp.postgresql.org. I don't want to waste
postgresql.org's disk space or bandwidth.

Or, to recast the question, do people think it's a good idea for PGDG to have
a 'canonical' general, master, source RPM to try to keep the various
RPM-based distributions using a common base for more consistent installs
(that become easier to support and troubleshoot)? If the consensus is that
we should just let the distributions do all the work and maintain parallel
variants (hosted by their own servers), well, that's OK with me. I can go
off to the Fedora Core people and volunteer to just keep up the Fedora Core
PostgreSQL RPM set, and forget about generic issues. Or even let someone
else do it; Red Hat has their own internal maintainer that is quite capable
of doing the job. Do I need to continue to do what I've been doing? I
certainly want to continue, but if the effort isn't needed, well, I can put
my energies elsewhere, both inside the PostgreSQL project as well as outside.
I certainly have learned a great deal while doing this, and don't regret any
of it.
--
Lamar Owen
Director of Information Technology
Pisgah Astronomical Research Institute
1 PARI Drive
Rosman, NC 28772
(828)862-5554
www.pari.edu

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Randolf Richardson, DevNet SysOp 29 2003-11-19 19:04:02 Re: Humor me: Postgresql vs. MySql (esp. licensing)
Previous Message Lamar Owen 2003-11-19 18:49:17 Re: SuSE RPMs available for PostgreSQL 7.4