Re: ecpg and bison again
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: ecpg and bison again |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 3591.1024491991@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: ecpg and bison again (Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org>) |
| Ответы |
Re: ecpg and bison again
Re: ecpg and bison again Re: ecpg and bison again |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org> writes:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2002 at 04:41:57PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org> writes:
> How about we add the preproc.c file generated by bison 1.49 to cvs?
> Could that create problems elsewhere?
>>
>> Yes. It's a bad idea to put derived files in CVS. For one thing,
>> CVS will not guarantee that their timestamps are right compared to
>> the master file.
> Actually I thought about changing the makefile as well, so preproc.c
> does not look like a derived file anymore.
That cure would be FAR worse than the disease. Leave it be.
The time for panic will be in August, if we are ready to make a beta
release and there's still no bison release. In the meantime I really
don't see why you can't keep updating your copy of preproc.y and
just not commit it...
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: