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

Re: Changes to handling version numbers internally

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Changes to handling version numbers internally
Date: 2000-06-30 01:31:33
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> The version number would be set in as in

Makes sense to me.  Right now there is a list someplace of all the
places that have to be edited to update the version number :-(.
If configure could help centralize/automate that, it'd be great.

I also concur that supporting non-numeric suffixes on the version
string would be a big improvement.

> I also think that we could scrap the pg_version program.

Yes, it seems like dead weight to me too.  I think that it
predates our use of configure, so at the time it might have
been necessary mechanism, but now...

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Philip WarnerDate: 2000-06-30 01:46:58
Subject: Re: AW: Proposal: More flexible backup/restore via pg_dump
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2000-06-30 01:26:20
Subject: Re: Installation layout

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group