From: | "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Fixed directory locations in installs |
Date: | 2004-05-02 20:38:32 |
Message-ID: | 6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCE171670@algol.sollentuna.se |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>> Common practice, for one thing. Windows programs are typically
>> relocatable, and Windows admins regard programs that rely on
>> hardcoded paths very poorly indeed.
>
>OK, but how can that work in general? How do other programs handle
>this? I don't think we should design a solution that goes
>like "ok, if
>we move that file from share to lib then we could get away with it for
>now". That will only postpone the potential problems. There needs to
>be a definite and fixed place where programs can go looking to
>find the
>files they need. Maybe it should be stored in that registry thing?
To make it work more cross-platform, replace "that registry thing" with
"postgresql.conf". It's basically the same thing, except the registry
has a hierarchy model.
And yes, that's how most other programs handle it.
//Magnus
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ted Kremenek | 2004-05-02 20:45:35 | Re: [CHECKER] 4 memory leaks in Postgresql 7.4.2 |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2004-05-02 20:04:43 | Re: Fixed directory locations in installs |