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

Re: Duration of beta period

From: Kevin <TenToThe8th(at)yahoo(dot)com>
To: Karl DeBisschop <kdebisschop(at)range(dot)infoplease(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Duration of beta period
Date: 2002-02-26 04:54:53
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Just for my own sanity, I agree that using the system packager is a good
idea.  Since I use Slackware, and finding a package for it is usually
difficult (I don't know if pgsql has one), I use checkinstall
(  It creates a system
package based on what 'make install' does. It can create Slackware
packges, RPMs and Debian packages.  Thus I can usually do 'cvs update &&
make && su -c checkinstall' without any probelms (usually because
sometimes you need a distclean/configure in there).  Of course running
out of CVS is probably not much better than the snapshots, but of course
how you get the source is up to you.


Karl DeBisschop wrote:
> On Sun, 2002-02-24 at 15:39, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > Karl DeBisschop writes:
> >
> > > It's one thing to as people to run a test. It's another thing still to
> > > ask them to run that test when the only readily available test method
> > > bypasses whatever administrative packaing policy is in place on those
> > > machines.
> >
> > It seems unlikely that many would want to install a development snapshot
> > as their main installation.
> Depends what you mean by main installation. I have a few Redhat servers
> whose only reason for existing is to test software. So would I want it
> to be my main installation for any production-related purpose? No. But
> would I want to track PostgreSQL development on that server? Sure, why
> not? At least why not if I can use RPM to cleanly remove the software.
> Our company policy is that wherever possible, the native package
> management tools should be used to install software on a machine,
> whether it's a development box or a production server. RPMs are the
> native packakging format for Redhat, so we hope to install software
> using RPM. I might add, particularly if it's not production software --
> since RPM then helps assure that everything that should be removed can
> be removed.
> Now it is true that I can just install it to part of my home directory,
> but that's less than fun over NFS.
> And the fact of the matter is, if the goal is to expand testing, which
> was what I was trying to comment on, you probably get alot of mileage in
> expanding that testing by making packages easy, RPMs, BSD packages,
> solaris packages , whatever. It's just a fact that there are people out
> there who have little interest in the guts of compilation, but still
> have the ability to install and burn in an alpha or beta release.
> Again, just my 2 cents.
> --
> Karl DeBisschop <kdebisschop(at)alert(dot)infoplease(dot)com>
> The Learning Network / Reference
> /
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Janardhana ReddyDate: 2002-02-26 07:03:54
Subject: Re: WAL Performance Improvements
Previous:From: Darcy BuskermolenDate: 2002-02-26 04:45:24
Subject: COPY FROM is not 8bit clean

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