Re: Daily snapshots hosed (was Re: [pgadmin-hackers] What

okay, daily snapshots are now being generated on the new server ... right
now, all the mirror sites are stale while Vince does some finishing
touches on the mirroring scripts/cgi's ... once he gerts that done, then,
from my perspective, we'll be ready for beta ...

On Mon, 8 Oct 2001, Tom Lane wrote:

> Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> > ... I can't find an up-to-date snapshot
>
> > I tried postgresql.rmplc.co.uk and got one (apparently) dated 7 Oct, however
> > CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION didn't seem to be there (it certainly doesn't
> > work anyway - syntax error at OR). I then looked in the primary copy on
> > mail.postgresql.org and found the copy there was dated 30 Sept from which I
> > assumed that the 07/10/2001 date on rm's copy was actually a US date - that
> > site has been seriously out of date before.
>
> I just downloaded
> ftp://ftp.us.postgresql.org/dev/postgresql-snapshot.tar.gz
> which has a date of yesterday in the FTP archives, but actually
> contains a snapshot from around 15 September as near as I can tell.
> Looks like something is hosed in the snapshot preparation process;
> Marc, could you take a look at it?
>
> >> and I don't know the
> >> magic that has to be worked on the PostgreSQL CVS version of the
> >> configure script in order to make it run without barfing.
>
> > I always assumed that something is done when the tarballs are built as the
> > work just fine on the same machine.
>
> No, the tarballs should be the same as what you get from a CVS pull
> of the same date (other than not having a lot of /CVS subdirectories).
> In fact, they're made basically by tar'ing up a CVS checkout. Please
> try diffing configure from a tarball against one from CVS to see if you
> can figure out what's getting munged during your CVS pull.
>
> > The only odd thing I can think of is
> > that my copy of the source is maintained on my PC using WinCVS and was
> > zipped/ftp'd onto a test box.
>
> LF vs CR/LF newlines leap to mind as a likely source of trouble...
> though I'm not sure why that would manifest in just this way...
>
> regards, tom lane
>