| From: | The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Ryan Bradetich <rbrad(at)hpb50023(dot)boi(dot)hp(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Re: autoconf does not recognize HP-UX 11.00. |
| Date: | 1999-08-16 02:57:11 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.BSF.4.10.9908152356000.401-100000@thelab.hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 9 Aug 1999, Tom Lane wrote:
> Ryan Bradetich <rbrad(at)hpb50023(dot)boi(dot)hp(dot)com> writes:
> > Looks like autoconf has been updated.
>
> >> This has been fixed. Pick up a recent revision of config.guess from the
> >> Autoconf CVS repository.
>
> I suspected as much. I'll make a point of pulling up-to-date configure
> support files from the Autoconf repository whenever we approach a
> major release of Postgres.
>
> The next question is whether we ought to back-patch such updates into
> our stable-release series or not? If they're not formal releases from
> the Autoconf guys I hesitate to do that...
My opinion is yes, we should..."stable releases", IMHO, fix existing bugs
that can be done without major re-writes. I'd say a good portion of the
"bugs" are going to be porting related, and some of those are merely
'Autoconf' related...
Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org secondary: scrappy(at){freebsd|postgresql}.org
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | The Hermit Hacker | 1999-08-16 03:00:49 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [ANNOUNCE] New man pages |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 1999-08-16 02:56:30 | libpq drops error messages received just before backend crash |