Re: [INTERFACES] Re: [HACKERS] Access & Postgres

From: "Thomas G(dot) Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
To: David Hartwig <daveh(at)insightdist(dot)com>
Cc: Postgres Hackers List <hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Re: [HACKERS] Access & Postgres
Date: 1998-07-09 14:25:30
Message-ID: 35A4D2DA.2D066E6C@alumni.caltech.edu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-interfaces

> I am curious though. Did you apply the patch, mentioned below, to
> your latest 6.4 tree? This patch should have been already part of
> the latest 6.4. And, to my knowledge, it was already applied
> completely and successfully.

I did my final tests using a fresh cvs tree two days ago just before
committing my big "patch wad". In the last two or three weeks I did have
a "merge problem" with my patches in the resjunk area, which might have
been the patches you are talking about.

> Now that I think of it, though, this version of the patch does not
> include the new "output" and "sql" files necessary for the regression
> test. In any case, I should clean that up.

I am in the process of renaming and moving the "resjunk" test to
"select_implicit". Will try to commit the changes this morning so it is
available to you.

At the moment, all regression tests (except "random") pass on my Linux
box :)

- Tom

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Maarten Boekhold 1998-07-09 14:31:24 Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Backend as SW Gateway to Oracle
Previous Message Egon Schmid 1998-07-09 14:17:10 InitPostgres() fails through libpq

Browse pgsql-interfaces by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Cyril FERRAND 1998-07-09 14:49:04 a JDBC applet
Previous Message David Hartwig 1998-07-09 14:13:43 Re: [INTERFACES] AOLserver 2.3