Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] RedHat6.0 & Alpha - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas Lockhart
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] RedHat6.0 & Alpha
Date
Msg-id 37A2654D.E9EDAC5F@alumni.caltech.edu
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] RedHat6.0 & Alpha  (Ryan Kirkpatrick <rkirkpat@nag.cs.colorado.edu>)
List pgsql-hackers
> > I just want to comment on what you are saying about generating a Debian
> > source package.  There will be a problem, because you are proposing to
> > provide source that will be different from the main 6.5.1 source; however,
> > the Debian archive assumes that source is identical across all architectures.

The RH RPM distribution has the same constraints. I have hopes that I
can take the v6.5.1 tarball, Ryan's patches, a test on RH Alpha, and
then validate them for the i386 (and sparc, with a volunteer tester)
architectures. If that flys, then perhaps we should commit to a v6.5.2
which *does* contain these changes, but imho we should postpone the
discussion of that until we have shown exactly what it takes.

If validating on i386 succeeds, we can also do a v6.5.1+patches build
of an RPM, and presumably the Debian packaging could work this way
too. So it doesn't absolutely require a commit back to the Postgres
cvs branch if we don't have a consensus on that.

                         - Thomas

--
Thomas Lockhart                lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu
South Pasadena, California

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Ryan Kirkpatrick
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] RedHat6.0 & Alpha
Next
From: Roberth Andersson
Date:
Subject: IPC Memory problem with Postmaster on BSDi 4.x