On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 2:32 PM, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Christopher Browne wrote:
>>
>> I'm getting "paper cuts" quite a bit these days over the differences
>> between what different packaging systems decide to install. The one
>> *I* get notably bit on, of late, is that I have written code that
>> expects to have pg_config to do some degree of self-discovery, only to
>> find production folk complaining that they only have "psql" available
>> in their environment.
>
> Given the other improvements in being able to build extensions in 9.1, we
> really should push packagers to move pg_config from the PostgreSQL
> development package into the main one starting in that version. I've gotten
> bit by this plenty of times.
I'm agreeable to that, in general.
If there's a "server" package and a "client" package, it likely only
fits with the "server" package. On a host where only the "client" is
installed, they won't be able to install extensions, so it's pretty
futile to have it there.
--
When confronted by a difficult problem, solve it by reducing it to the
question, "How would the Lone Ranger handle this?"
