okay, daily snapshots are now being generated on the new server ... right
now, all the mirror sites are stale while Vince does some finishing
touches on the mirroring scripts/cgi's ... once he gerts that done, then,
from my perspective, we'll be ready for beta ...
On Mon, 8 Oct 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk> writes:
> > ... I can't find an up-to-date snapshot
>
> > I tried postgresql.rmplc.co.uk and got one (apparently) dated 7 Oct, however
> > CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION didn't seem to be there (it certainly doesn't
> > work anyway - syntax error at OR). I then looked in the primary copy on
> > mail.postgresql.org and found the copy there was dated 30 Sept from which I
> > assumed that the 07/10/2001 date on rm's copy was actually a US date - that
> > site has been seriously out of date before.
>
> I just downloaded
> ftp://ftp.us.postgresql.org/dev/postgresql-snapshot.tar.gz
> which has a date of yesterday in the FTP archives, but actually
> contains a snapshot from around 15 September as near as I can tell.
> Looks like something is hosed in the snapshot preparation process;
> Marc, could you take a look at it?
>
> >> and I don't know the
> >> magic that has to be worked on the PostgreSQL CVS version of the
> >> configure script in order to make it run without barfing.
>
> > I always assumed that something is done when the tarballs are built as the
> > work just fine on the same machine.
>
> No, the tarballs should be the same as what you get from a CVS pull
> of the same date (other than not having a lot of /CVS subdirectories).
> In fact, they're made basically by tar'ing up a CVS checkout. Please
> try diffing configure from a tarball against one from CVS to see if you
> can figure out what's getting munged during your CVS pull.
>
> > The only odd thing I can think of is
> > that my copy of the source is maintained on my PC using WinCVS and was
> > zipped/ftp'd onto a test box.
>
> LF vs CR/LF newlines leap to mind as a likely source of trouble...
> though I'm not sure why that would manifest in just this way...
>
> regards, tom lane
>