| From: | Peter Eisentraut <e99re41(at)DoCS(dot)UU(dot)SE> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | "Sergio A(dot) Kessler" <sak(at)tribctas(dot)gba(dot)gov(dot)ar>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] rpms |
| Date: | 2000-03-02 15:58:42 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.GSO.4.02A.10003021654220.27493-100000@Dront.DoCS.UU.SE |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 1 Mar 2000, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
> Anyway, afaik most RPM distros of a product have one .rpm file which
> has the name of the package, and then may have other .rpm files which
> have qualifiers, like "-server". So in choosing which .rpm file will
> be the base package, it seemed most appropriate that it be the
> client-side stuff, as opposed to docs, or server (which btw can't
> really be run on its own without the client stuff installed
> *somewhere*), or something else.
Usually, the "base" package somehow contains what the package centers
around and the -xxx packages are supplements (like -headers, -devel,
-foointerface). Arguably, PostgreSQL centers around the database server.
Why not just name the packages postgresql-server and postgresql-client and
have no 'postgresql' as such. That should alleviate any confusion
whatsoever.
--
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders väg 10:115
peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net 75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2000-03-02 16:13:55 | Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL on Solaris/SPARC with gcc |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2000-03-02 15:24:56 | Re: [BUGS] grant/revoke bug with delete/update |