Re: Search machine is ready

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Eisentraut [mailto:peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net]
> Sent: 17 February 2006 14:54
> To: pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Cc: Dave Page
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] Search machine is ready
>
> Am Mittwoch, 15. Februar 2006 17:40 schrieb Dave Page:
> > - Vendor changes. I don't like to run packages I know to
> have been changed
> > by the vendor - for example, it was noted the other day
> that the Debian
> > PostgreSQL packages contains patches that aren't in PGDG
> releases. In this
> > case the only OS vendor I would trust with a modified
> PostgreSQL is Red
> > Hat, for fairly obvious reasons.
>
> Clearly, you have never looked into the Debian packages.
> Otherwise you would
> have seen that the patches are completely trivial and not
> related to changing
> any functionality.

No I haven't, nor do I have any desire to. Aside from the fact that I
was using that only as an example, seeing comments like:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-02/msg00281.php and
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-02/msg00310.php is
enough to put anyone off (or probably should be).

As it happens the one I was thinking of was a patch to the Kerberos auth
code, which even Tom was unsure of for at least a while from what I
recall. If he is unsure about such a 'trivial' patch, then the vast
majority of the rest of us probably should be as well.

I shall stick to building my own packages for all distros thank you.

Regards, Dave.