On 09/20/2010 08:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stefan Kaltenbrunner<stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc> writes:
>> On 09/20/2010 08:21 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Well, I'm testing with an unmodified copy of 1.12.13, and I got output
>>> matching our historical tarballs. So I'm blaming debian for this one.
>
>> As far as I know magnus is using a debian based CVS server for his
>> testing so that would certainly be 1.12.x - are you too?
>
> No server anywhere: I'm reading from a local repository which is a
> tarball copy of the one on cvs.postgresql.org. 1.12.13 is the only
> version in question. (I believe Magnus is not using a server either;
> the cvs2git documentation says that it will only work from a local repo,
> and even if that's not true I shudder to think how long it would take
> over a network.)
http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/info-cvs/2004-07/msg00106.html
is what I'm refering too and what the debian people provided a patch to
work around for(starting with1:1.12.9-17 in 2005) - nut sure why you are
not seeing it...
Stefan