Re: Relocatable installs

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Relocatable installs
Date: 2004-05-08 23:30:39
Message-ID: 200405082330.i48NUdD07121@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Ah, got it. Makes sense. We do searches for finding our own path, but
> > you can argue that this predictable --- we know we are running so the
> > binary must be somewhere. :-) However, the version checking we do now
> > is a little non-predictable because if we find a binary of the wrong
> > version, we keep looking in the path.
>
> Hm? I see no version checks in FindExec. It looks to me like the code
> is just trying to ensure that it finds the same file that the shell
> would have found.

I thought it was in ValidateBinary, but now I don't see it. I must have
gotten it confused by pg_dumpall. And I see now that initdb only checks
the version and exits if it is wrong. It does not keep trying the path.

OK, we are better than I thought. :-)

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephan Szabo 2004-05-08 23:33:51 Re: cast not IMMUTABLE?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2004-05-08 23:29:49 Re: Relocatable installs