A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Mascari) wrote: > Lamar Owen wrote: > >> On Tuesday 09 March 2004 10:46 am, Tom Lane wrote: >> >>>Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> >>>>BTW, I can't really see the harm in putting out 7.1.x and 7.2.x >>>>releases to fix compilation issues on modern systems. >>> >>>Also, quite frankly, I don't want to encourage people to keep using >>>such old releases. If they are installing on a new machine they should >>>update to something newer and less buggy. >> We need the older versions to be compilable on newer systems to ease >> in version upgrades and migration. > > How could they find themselves in a situation where they have a 7.1 > installation that requires dumping for migration, but no binaries due > to compilation errors? Isn't that a rather low-probability scenario?
The problem isn't so much that of "complete inability" to get binaries, but rather of it becoming significantly inconvenient to get those binaries. What if we had a RHAT 6.3 system running PG 7.1, and the "system" partition got dumped on? We have the data directory; we'd like to mount it on a spicy new RHAT 8.0 system, and recover it. If I rummage around looking for tips, I can doubtless discover the set of things that need to get patched in order to recompile on RHAT 8.0; it sure would be nice to not have to rummage round for them. -- wm(X,Y):-write(X),write('@'),write(Y). wm('cbbrowne','cbbrowne.com'). http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/sgml.html "The beginning of wisdom for a [software engineer] is to recognize the difference between getting a program to work, and getting it right." -- M A Jackson, 1975 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]