On Wed, Mar 09, 2011 at 07:05:19PM -0500, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> Good question, I hadn't thought of that either, and thinking about
> it a bit I think we'd want to keep the current behaviour of \i and
> provide new behaviour using a new command.
> Say when we are processing a pretty nested file after multiple \ir
> commands, a \i <relative path file> in any of those files should
> look for that file in psql's CWD/PWD. That is what the user expects
> from \i command currently and I don't think it'd be desirable to
> break that assumption.

I'm not sure I understand.  Stuff that worked before would still work.

Should stuff break when it has a legitimately accessible path in it
just because that path is relative?

David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778  AIM: dfetter666  Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter      XMPP: david.fet...@gmail.com
iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to