From: | rhubbell <Rhubbell(at)iHubbell(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Pet Peeves? |
Date: | 2009-02-08 05:33:36 |
Message-ID: | 20090207213336.0b286d3b.Rhubbell@iHubbell.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Sat, 7 Feb 2009 19:30:37 -0800
Steve Atkins <steve(at)blighty(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Feb 7, 2009, at 7:09 PM, rhubbell wrote:
>
> > In the case of DBD::Pg it seems that it just uses the output of
> > pg_config. It seems absurd that that information can't be stored in
> > psql. There must be some good reason that it's not.
> > Is it because psql is stripped?
> >
> > At least the build information (which pg_config spits out) could be
> > stored
> > in a text file that psql knows about and then psql --buildopts would
> > give you that information.
>
> But what would you do with the information then? Most anything
> (including
> building DBD::Pg) that wants that data is going to need the developer
> package.
Oh, that's right DBD::Pg needs to compile against the pg dev bits.
>
> Cheers,
> Steve
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2009-02-08 09:25:56 | Re: encoding of PostgreSQL messages |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2009-02-08 05:30:54 | Re: weakness and strenghts of PG |