Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Win32 version numbers not correct (again, but this one is easy)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>,PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Win32 version numbers not correct (again, but this one is easy)
Date: 2004-12-31 03:57:26
Message-ID: 1372.1104465446@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hmm, is that the only place we missed it?  Might be worth diffing a make
>> distclean'd tree against a virgin one.

> I was under the impression we only wanted a new version number with a
> configure run, however, I can see that "make clean" perhaps should do it
> too.

No, it's not the source code file he's complaining about.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: ramesh phuleDate: 2004-12-31 05:26:48
Subject: reqd patch
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2004-12-31 01:16:18
Subject: Re: Win32 version numbers not correct (again, but this one

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group