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

Re: [PORTS] plpgsql & bsdi 4.0

From: Nat Howard <nrh(at)pupworks(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Nat Howard <nrh(at)pupworks(dot)com>, pgsql-ports(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PORTS] plpgsql & bsdi 4.0
Date: 1999-09-19 23:38:09
Message-ID: 199909192338.TAA14108@spot.pupworks.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-ports
>> Any suggestions?  Thanks in advance...
>
>6.5.2 should have allowed you to use either bison or yacc.  I am running
>bsdi 4.0, but have never fooled around with plpgsql.
>

Thanks for chiming in...

It otherwise seems to do fine (at least on the regression
tests), but it does fail the plpgsql regression test, and I need plpgsql.  

I'm startled that you think that either bison or yacc would work.
Out of the box, every plpgsql invocation fails (and thus everything in 
the plpgsql regression test) with the unresolved symbol error.

Does a virgin 6.5.2 install pass the plpgsql regression test on your
4.0 bsdi box?  Thanks.

Responses

pgsql-ports by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 1999-09-20 02:14:42
Subject: Re: [PORTS] plpgsql & bsdi 4.0
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 1999-09-19 20:57:10
Subject: Re: [PORTS] plpgsql & bsdi 4.0

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