Re: Fixed directory locations in installs

Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Also, Win32 installs are going to want to be more directory
> > independent than Unix.
>
> Why?

Because when I install Win32 stuff on my machine via an installer, it
says "Where do you want the files" and puts it in C:\ or C:\Program
Files or whatever I supply. We need to have that functionality.

> > Because Win32 can probe for the location of the binary, it seems it
> > should check to see if it can find libdir and sharedir own its own
> > and set those GUC values accordingly as part of initdb.
>
> This is just going to open up the possibility of silently finding the
> wrong files.

Yes, it does. We need to check if the directory actually exists. If
the files we need don't exist in there, we will throw an error anyway,
and they will have to use a flag to specify the location. Win32 is
going to install everything under one directory anyway, so it should
work fine in most cases.

The only problem case would be where you have an initdb binary that sits
in a directory tree where the ../share and ../lib have files that initdb
needs, but they don't match the initdb version or something, but that
seems like a wacked-out configuration by any measure.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073