Re: Hokey wrong versions of libpq in apt.postgresql.org

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Steve Crawford
Тема Re: Hokey wrong versions of libpq in apt.postgresql.org
Дата
Msg-id 53EA4E40.9040905@pinpointresearch.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Hokey wrong versions of libpq in apt.postgresql.org  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Ответы Re: Hokey wrong versions of libpq in apt.postgresql.org  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 08/07/2014 04:30 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I know this has been brought up before:
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20140724080902.GA28113@msg.df7cb.de

For reference, libpq and packaging issues discussed here as well:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/53A304BC.40908@pinpointresearch.com
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/53989C91.6050403@pinpointresearch.com

>
> But this is just plain wrong. I don't care that the FAQ (on the wiki) 
> says we are doing it wrong for good reasons. When I (or anyone else) 
> pulls postgresql-$version-dev, I want the libpq for my version. I do 
> not want 9.3.
>
> Yes, it "should" (because of protocol compatibility) work but it 
> doesn't always (as stated in that email and in a similar problem we 
> just ran into).
>
> There can be unintended circumstances on machines when you mix and 
> match like that. Can we please do some proper packaging on this?

+1

Cheers,
Steve



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Andres Freund
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [RFC] Should smgrtruncate() avoid sending sinval message for temp relations
Следующее
От: Pavel Stehule
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: PL/PgSQL: RAISE and the number of parameters