Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess seems a tad confused]

> On Mon, 20 Sep 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > I got the final version <24 hours from release. It was in my tree, but
> > now it isn't, and it isn't in 6.5.2 either.
> >
> > I asked for the author to verify my work. I am adding it to the tree
> > now. What do we do?
>
> Either make a 6.5.3, inline 6.5.2 (6.5.2a, anyone??) or leave 6.5.2 as is.
> None is ideal -- although a 6.5.3 is better than a badly broken 6.5.2. The
> short term solution is for those using 6.5.2 to download the pgaccess-0.98
> tarball from flex.ro.
>
> I ran across the depopulated pgaccess tree this morning while starting the
> build cycle for the 6.5.2 rpms -- good thing I have already dealt with that
> issue with previous packages. For the RPM's, it has been practice for some time
> to include the very latest pgaccess as a separate tarball, then untarring it
> over top of the one in the main tarball during the package build. I was hoping
> to get away from that. ;-(

Yes, I have created a bad situation. pgaccess it very important for pgsql.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026