Re: Version numbers for binaries

Hi! Sounds good, thanks.

--
Deepak

On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 12:20 AM, deepak <deepak(dot)pn(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Hi !
> >
> > We bundle Postgres into a Windows MSI, Postgres built with VS2008.
> >
> > One of the issues we ran into recently is Windows getting confused with
> the
> > file
> > versions of Postgres binaries, confused meaning, it was treating newer
> > binaries
> > as older, and hence skipping copying certain files during an upgrade.
> >
> > Looking further, I came across the file where version numbers for some of
> > the
> > binaries are generated (including pg_ctl.exe), and it used to use 2 digit
> > year
> > followed by day of year, without any padding. We need to pad the day of
> > year
> > with leading zeros to make the version non-decreasing.
> >
> > I've included a patch below, could this be patched into Postgres?
>
> Thanks, I've applied a change like this (though with the description
> mainly in the commit message and not in a code comment, so not using
> your patch) for head and backpatched it into the supported branches,
> as it's clearly wrong.
>
> For future reference, please post patches to the pgsql-hackers
> mailinglist, instead of the pgsql-general, to make sure that it gets
> the attention of the developers. It worked this time, but that's
> better for next time.
>
> --
> Magnus Hagander
> Me: http://www.hagander.net/
> Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
>