On Thu, 18 May 2000, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
> > > Hello Masaaki. Could we consider packaging pgbash into our postgres
> > > RPMs for Linux? That would make it available on a *lot* more
> > > installations, and would be a very nice addition to the RPMs.
> > Yes, please :-). I'm glad you like it.
> Lamar, how about it? Packaging it completely separately (as, say,
> pgbash-2.1-1.i386.rpm) seems to make it hard to match up with other
> postgres-related RPMs. Does postgresql-pgbash-xxx work, or should we
> keep it separate? The version number is a problem if we merge it
> directly into the postgresql rpm set.
And what create separate space for pg-family software (like pgbash, pgadmin
pgaccess ...etc)? For software which are not primary devel in pg CVS, but
we want "push" these software to distribution. Create for this software some
web space (like KDE software family) and garante for users simular names
(for example postgresql-softname-version.rpm) and for develepers that their
software will in distributions.
In response to
pgsql-interfaces by date
|Next:||From: Milan Madzia||Date: 2000-05-19 13:12:07|
|Subject: How to use latin1 and latin2 in one db with JDBC|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2000-05-18 14:37:21|
|Subject: Re: Error: for type 1700 |