Tom Lane wrote:
> Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I certainly don't see the point of the implementation as you have it
>>> --- it adds a great deal of unnecessary infrastructure compared to just
>>> installing a symlink at share/postgresql/timezone.
>> The point of my solution is that all packagers who interested in use
>> only configure switch instead of playing with link integration. In this
>> case, Packager also must cleanup build-in timezones after make install.
>> This is not only about add one line into spec file.
> No, it's two lines (rm -rf, ln -s). It'll take many more lines than
> that to do it in the Postgres configure/build system, even using the
> simpler symlink approach. And quite aside from the code addition, what
> of documentation? How much text will it take to make clear what this
> switch is good for and when it's safe to use?
> I just don't see the value of supporting this option in our
> configuration infrastructure. Anyone who is competent to determine
> whether it's a safe thing to use is more than competent to alter the
> installation that way for themselves.
I thought about it and You are right. It is really better to keep
solution on packagers, than extend infrastructure and give "machine gun"
to everybody :-).
Thanks for your time
In response to
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Magnus Hagander||Date: 2007-03-23 09:48:40|
|Subject: seg regression failures|
|Previous:||From: Magnus Hagander||Date: 2007-03-23 08:20:51|
|Subject: Re: contrib/spi makefile inconsistency|