-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> What logic would lead someone to separate pg_config from everything else?
>> Do people often just install the server and nothing else? Then what?
> This is actually *required* by Debian/Ubuntu packaging rules.
> The development environment must be packaged separately from shared libraries
> like libpq or else major snafus arise when a new soversion of libpq comes out.
> You need to be able to have both versions installed simultaneously (in case
> you have programs which require both) but that won't work if they both contain
> things like header files or executables.
I'm not sure I follow this. What makes pg_config so different from psql? I can't
imagine why it's not simply treated the same as pg_dump and psql. It's certainly
annoying to have to install a whole seperate package just to have access to it.
>> BTW I ran into the need for pg_config upon installing DBD::Pg.
>> Maybe DBD::Pg maintainer problem?
> Installing a package for DBD::Pg or building it? The former would indeed be a
> package bug.
AFAIK, no package has that problem. If there is one, someone raise a bug.
Greg Sabino Mullane greg(at)turnstep(dot)com
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200902072126
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
In response to
pgsql-general by date
|Next:||From: Greg Sabino Mullane||Date: 2009-02-08 02:57:16|
|Subject: Re: Pet Peeves?|
|Previous:||From: Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz||Date: 2009-02-07 22:24:09|
|Subject: Re: Strange limit and offset behaviour....|