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

Re: Version numbers on libpq.dll

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,PostgreSQL Win32 port list <pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org>,Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
Subject: Re: Version numbers on libpq.dll
Date: 2004-12-14 21:15:15
Message-ID: 200412142115.iBELFFX24004@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers-win32pgsql-patches
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >I question whether any of us will remember to modify libpq.rc if you
> >happen to be making a new installer twice in the same beta.  As a group
> >we forget even simpler things regularly.  And we would be adding an
> >additional change for each beta and each RC for only the installer.  I
> >am not inclined to add more work to a process that already is pretty
> >complex.
> >
> >However, that is Marc's roll and he can answer whether he can do it
> >reliably.  I am not involved in that process.
> 
> Is there any way to get it into the build process? The same place where
> it builds the other files in interfaces/libpq that are used in the MSVC
> build - the .def files. Perhaps the "last number" could be the cvs
> version number of configure.in or something? (This may be way off, I
> don't really know how those files are generated. But it should be
> possible to do with some fairly sinmple sed magic, I would think.)

We could do "date '+%y%j' to output 04349.  How many bits do we have for
that last comma value?  This would work unless you put out two
installers in the same day.  However, this would not work for VC and BCC
because they don't have 'date'.  This would give us an ever-increasing
value for each release.

> >My point is that installing from CVS will always overwrite libpq.dll in
> >/lib, so it doesn't care what the version stamp is in the binary.  Only
> >the installer cares about the internal version stamp.
> 
> Right on the first. Wrong on the second.
> Not "only the installer". *any* installer (if somebody embeds
> postgresql). *any* deployment program (such as Systems Management
> Server) used in an enteprise to distribute products. The "official MSI"
> is just one of several possibilities. If we make it good enough it will
> get rid of some others (for example, SMS could use it in silent mode to
> install - but depending on corporate policy that may not be acceptable),
> but there will be others.

I see.  So you imagine other people building and doing installs,
especially client-only ones.  That makes sense, though as I mentioned
above this does not work for VC or BCC builds, on MinGW.

-- 
  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

In response to

Responses

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Jaime CasanovaDate: 2004-12-14 21:26:29
Subject: Re: From latin9 to sql_ascii??
Previous:From: Guillaume LELARGEDate: 2004-12-14 21:05:41
Subject: Last french .po file

pgsql-hackers-win32 by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2004-12-15 04:45:54
Subject: Patch to add version numbers to libpq.rc
Previous:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2004-12-14 21:01:49
Subject: Re: Version numbers on libpq.dll

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