Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Re: [GENERAL] 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest version?)

From: teg(at)redhat(dot)com (Trond Eivind =?iso-8859-1?q?Glomsr=F8d?=)
To: Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Re: [GENERAL] 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest version?)
Date: 2000-11-02 19:31:20
Message-ID: xuy66m62mt3.fsf@hoser.devel.redhat.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-hackerspgsql-ports
Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> writes:

> Now, J Random slides in the new OS CD on a backup of his main server,
> and upgrades.  RedHat 7.2's installer is very smart -- if no packages
> are left that use glibc 2.0, it doesn't install the compat-libs
> necessary for glibc 2.0 apps to run.

Actually, glibc is a bad example of things to break - it has versioned
symbols, so postgresql is pretty likely to continue working (barring
doing extremely low-level stuff, like doing weird things to the loader
or depend on buggy behaviour (like Oracle did)).

Postgresql doesn't use C++ either (which is a horrible mess wrt. binary
compatibility - there is no such thing, FTTB).

However, if it depended on kernel specific behaviour (like things in
/proc, which may or may not have changed its output format) it could
break.


-- 
Trond Eivind Glomsrød
Red Hat, Inc.

In response to

pgsql-ports by date

Next:From: Jason TishlerDate: 2000-11-02 19:50:28
Subject: [PATCH]: Building PostgreSQL 7.0.2 on Cygwin 1.1.4 (Take 3)
Previous:From: Lamar OwenDate: 2000-11-02 19:22:19
Subject: Re: Re: [GENERAL] 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest version?)

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Martin A. MarquesDate: 2000-11-02 19:32:54
Subject: Re: status applications
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2000-11-02 19:30:44
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/contrib/pg_dumpaccounts (Makefile README pg_dumpaccounts.sh)

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Steve WolfeDate: 2000-11-02 19:40:07
Subject: Re: how good is PostgreSQL
Previous:From: Justin FosterDate: 2000-11-02 19:26:10
Subject: Re: Memory Leak

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group