| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, Joel Miller <joelwmiller(at)sbcglobal(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [SUGGESTION] CVSync |
| Date: | 2006-03-25 04:22:24 |
| Message-ID: | 14330.1143260544@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
> I agree that investigating alternatives would be a good idea: AFAIK
> there's no easy way to build cvsup on Linux/AMD64 (without patches and
> more pain than I'm willing to endure), so I use cvsup on one machine and
> then periodically rsync a copy of that to my main (AMD64) machine.
Actually, the last time I looked seriously at cvsup, my requirement was
that it build on HPUX, which it did not (well, maybe it would've with
sufficient investment of pain, but that wasn't happening). I was about
to take another look at whether I couldn't just-install-it on FC4, but
my main FC4 machine is now x86_64, so your remarks are discouraging me
again :-(
This whole discussion reminds me why we've stuck so fervently to
bog-standard ANSI C for Postgres. There is a payoff for taking
portability seriously. Too bad the original authors of cvsup were more
interested in using a flavor-of-the-month programming language...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2006-03-25 04:31:02 | Re: [SUGGESTION] CVSync |
| Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2006-03-25 04:13:16 | Re: [SUGGESTION] CVSync |