Re: RPM source files should be in CVS (was Re: psql -l)

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> Oliver Elphick" <olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: RPM source files should be in CVS (was Re: psql -l)
Date: 2001-07-20 16:30:36
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.30.0107201825440.713-100000@peter.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

Lamar Owen writes:

> The RPM additions are:
> 56 contrib-intarray.tar.gz
> 4 file-lists.tar.gz
> 8 migration-scripts.tar.gz

No tar or gz files in CVS.

> 4 postgresql-7.1.plperl.patch
> 4 postgresql-7.1.s390x.patch

No patches in CVS.

> 4 postgresql-bashprofile

Not sure what's in there exactly, so I can't comment.

> 4 postgresql-dump.1.gz

What's wrong with pg_dump?

> 8 postgresql.init

We already have one of those.

> 4 rh-pgdump.sh

See above.

> 8 rpm-pgsql-7.1.patch

See above.

See, if we want to get into the packaging business for real, then there
should not be any patches or extra programs or extra features distributed.
Fixes should be incorporated, not archived.

Then again, there are at least six other packaging efforts out there which
come with yet another set of patches and what not so I see this getting
messy.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net http://funkturm.homeip.net/~peter

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2001-07-20 16:33:03 Re: regression test failure on abstime
Previous Message Lamar Owen 2001-07-20 16:28:33 Re: RPM source files should be in CVS (was Re: psql -l)

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2001-07-20 16:35:34 Re: RPM source files should be in CVS (was Re: psql -l)
Previous Message Lamar Owen 2001-07-20 16:28:33 Re: RPM source files should be in CVS (was Re: psql -l)