Re: Linux LSB init script

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: "David Fetter" <david(at)fetter(dot)org>,<pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Linux LSB init script
Date: 2009-08-31 20:17:31
Message-ID: 4A9BE98B020000250002A66E@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:

> While the major distributions support LSB, the major distributions
> also have PostgreSQL packages available and so will likely not need
> the init script shipped in the source.

My counter-argument to that would be that the SuSE distribution's
version of PostgreSQL is so out-of-date that we don't install it. It
also doesn't enable debug info or integer date times. So we switched
to build from source before we actually got as far as loading any
data. I'm inclined to recommend the same to others.

> it might be best to keep both, if they are maintained.

Sounds good to me; although, now that there is a full LSB version, I
should probably withdraw my meager suggested patch to the existing
linux script, eh? (If they're using an LSB conforming implementation,
they'll want the linux-lsb script, and if they're not, the suggested
patch has no point, I think.) Unless someone thinks otherwise, I'll
drop that patch to the linux script from the CF page. Any thoughts on
what that script needs, if anything?

-Kevin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2009-08-31 20:20:59 Re: \d+ for long view definitions?
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2009-08-31 20:13:11 Re: \d+ for long view definitions?