From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, nicolas(at)marchildon(dot)net, Bugs for PostgreSQL <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: BUG #8139: initdb: Misleading error message when current user not in /etc/passwd |
Date: | 2014-01-10 23:04:12 |
Message-ID: | 20140110230412.GA15692@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 05:23:43PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Are we not moving items over to common where appropriate?
>
> I don't think we're moving code from src/port to src/common just for the
> heck of it; but ISTM if we're adding new code which belongs to
> src/common, and there's a natural file for it in src/port which should
> arguably also be in src/common, then it makes sense to put both the new
> code and the old file together in src/common.
>
> Note that nothing in src/port should depend on stuff in src/common. As
> I see it, src/port is very bare-bones stuff which src/common builds on
> top of. It might also make sense, in some cases, to consider low-level
> routines in src/port that are used by higher level routines in
> src/common.
OK, C file moved from /port to /common.
> > Are we worried about bring external applications?
>
> Please rephrase. What are we worried about?
I was asking if we did not move old functions from port to common
because of concern about breaking 3rd party applications.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-01-11 01:32:02 | Re: BUG #8771: Query execution plan broken after upgrade from 9.1.9 |
Previous Message | lcampbell | 2014-01-10 21:39:03 | BUG #8782: Segmentation Fault during initialization |