From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> |
Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, "pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Some restructuring of the download section |
Date: | 2012-06-17 16:40:15 |
Message-ID: | 27201.1339951215@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-www |
Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> writes:
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>> Uh, that part is just incorrect. Several sets of platform packages
>> certainly do initdb for you. And AFAIK every single one of them on
>> Linux at least do service setup for you.
> Hmm, clearly it's been a while since I did a PG installation on Debian
> (oddly!), as that does seem to leave the server up and running. I'm
> fairly certain it didn't in the past.
> RPMs on the other hand, do not.
FWIW, Red-Hat-based systems have a strong distro policy against starting
servers merely because the package got installed --- the theory is that
an "everything" install should not leave the user running a bunch of
servers he doesn't know about and maybe hasn't configured securely.
I'm a bit surprised to hear that Debian does it differently; although
it's possible that they distinguish manual from automatic install
scenarios. It's a little bit saner to do an auto service start if you
know that the user explicitly requested this specific package.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2012-06-17 21:54:28 | Re: Some restructuring of the download section |
Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2012-06-17 16:21:17 | Re: Some restructuring of the download section |