Re: [HACKERS] Did the inet type get backed out?

Thus spake Tom Ivar Helbekkmo
> Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > I have again re-added the BAD defines because there are calls to
> > existing function are causing errors. Basically, inet is broken.

Damn! I guess I did change those functions. Sorry about that.

> Whoops. Looks like D'Arcy changed those function calls in the patch
> from him that you applied -- probably because you were planning to
> change the inet_net_*() functions, right, D'Arcy? I don't have time
> to look at them right now, but if monday comes around and we don't
> have the new version of the INET type in place, I'll have to do the
> work locally to get it back to the working state it was in, anyway,
> and I'll submit complete patches then. I'm using the current state
> of the PostgreSQL code in production here, and I really, really need
> a working INET type, like, right now. :-)

Paul said that he expects to have his stuff in this weekend. I promise
to test and submit my stuff the minute I see it.

--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy(at){druid|vex}.net> | Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on
+1 416 424 2871 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.