Re: [HACKERS] pg_config --version-num - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: [HACKERS] pg_config --version-num
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqQnTr9zZnFGY34i4cSTw5KHzU-Uv40PtfiH1uoNdiZm7w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to [HACKERS] pg_config --version-num  (Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] pg_config --version-num  (Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>)
Re: [HACKERS] pg_config --version-num  ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 6:14 PM, Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Attached is a small patch to teach pg_config how to output a --version-num
>
> With Pg 10, parsing versions got more annoying. Especially with
> "10beta1", "9.6beta2" etc into the mix. It makes no sense to force
> tools and scripts to do this when we can just expose a sensible
> pre-formatted one at no cost to us.
>
> Personally I'd like to backpatch this into supported back branches,
> but just having it in pg 10 would be  a help.

The last threads treating about the same subject are here:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAB7nPqTAdAJpX8iK4V3uYJbO2Kmo8rHzqJKDsLaDdranNrGX_A@mail.gmail.com
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20161127001648.GA21874@fetter.org
Is the data in Makefile.global unsufficient?
-- 
Michael



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeevan Ladhe
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Adding support for Default partition in partitioning
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: [JDBC] [HACKERS] Channel binding support for SCRAM-SHA-256