From: | Karl DeBisschop <karl(at)debisschop(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | |
Cc: | pgsql-ports(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: RPM changes for 7.1. |
Date: | 2000-12-13 23:21:24 |
Message-ID: | 3A380474.998BE199@debisschop.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-ports |
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> Similarly, I find it not useful that PL/Perl and thrown together with
> Pg.pm, and PL/Tcl is thrown together with pgtclsh. Maybe you want to make
> a separate postgresql-server-{perl,tcl} package. I think you already
> suggested that.
I agree -- I use DBD, and thus do not feel the need for Pg.pm, but I do use
PL/Perl.
> > However, I am not leaning towards a separate docs subpackage -- it was
> > suggested to me, and I placed it on my list for discussion.
>
> I don't think this is a bad idea. Maybe people only want to install the
> docs once in their network and make them available via a web server. I
> did it that way.
I have created docs packages in the past. Until I was reminded of the
--excludedocs option for rpm. Actually, I may have been one who suggested a
docs package for PostgreSQL)
> > Making the postgresql package depend upon the postgresql-libs package is
> > easy enough. That means you do have at leats two packages to install.
>
> (On a quiet night you can hear the Debian users laughing...)
>
> > One example of a split that seems to work well (AFAIK) is the amanda
> > network backup tool.
>
> > The main package contains files common to the client and server.
>
> In PostgreSQL there are, strictly speaking, no files in common to client
> and server.
>
> Two more points:
>
> * createlang, droplang, and pg_id should be in the server package.
>
> * Maybe you want to create a postgresql-server-devel package with the
> backend header files. These are needed rather seldom.
Would we have postgresql-server-devel and postgresql-clients-devel?
This splits things up rather finely, but it seems consistent, and I
tend to like that -- overall the way Lamar is going sounds very good
to me. And supports a point from an old discussion -- no matter how
good the developers are (and they are great) -- it really helps to
have a good packager as well.
--
Karl DeBisschop kdebisschop(at)alert(dot)infoplease(dot)com
Learning Network/Information Please http://www.infoplease.com
Netsaint Plugin Developer kdebisschop(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alfred Perlstein | 2000-12-13 23:42:46 | Re: Why vacuum? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-12-13 23:14:56 | Idea for reducing planning time |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Korshunov Ilya | 2000-12-14 08:24:07 | |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2000-12-13 20:05:03 | Re: RPM changes for 7.1. |