| From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Libpq PGRES_COPY_BOTH - version compatibility |
| Date: | 2011-01-02 09:36:35 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTimcmJdqDR5GSOh-iWAkUZkE+7M1mojY7iRF=RU3@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 19:49, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Dec 29, 2010, at 10:14 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>> We can be held responsible for the packaging decisions if they use
>> *our* "make install" commands, imho.
>
> Yep.
So, as I see it there are two ways of doing it - install a
catversion.h file and include it from libpq-fe.h, or modify the
libpq-fe.h. I still think modifying libpq-fe.h is the better of these
choices - but either of them would work. But is the catversion value
really the best interface for the user? This is about libpq
functionality level, which really has nothing to do with the backend
catalog, does it?
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2011-01-02 10:39:45 | Re: Sync Rep Design |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2011-01-02 09:29:27 | Re: management of large patches |