Tom Lane wrote:
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I can't commit but I can give access to a 2.59 version...
Well, easiest is for Tom to run autoconf 2.59 and commit ... or Bruce ...
Locally I've got several autoconf versions installed so that I can
update back-branch configure scripts properly. It'd probably be a good
idea to improve your release scripts so that they select the "right"
autoconf version for each release branch. You'll need multiple local
installations though, instead of depending on freebsd ports for the
"one true autoconf".
Either that or we try to move up all supported back branches to the
latest autoconf version; which might be a good idea but it scares me
a bit.
I say have a VMWare instance running with the "one true" autoconf that
is currently accepted. That way we don't have to make that distinction.
Autoconf 2.59 is going to be predominantly in the wild (rhel 5, centos5
, dapper, debian) for at least another 3-4 years.
Joshua D. Drake
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match
