On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 08:12:22PM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 05:52:39PM -0000, Andrew Hammond wrote:
> > On Jun 5, 9:19 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alvaro Herrera) wrote:
> > > Zdenek Kotala wrote:
> > > > Tom Lane wrote:
> > > > >Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > >>Is this a TODO?
> > >
> > > > >I don't think so; there is no demand from anybody but Zdenek to remove
> > > > >those programs. Has it ever even come up before?
> > >
> > > Personally I found really strange to have "createuser" and "createdb"
> > > shipped by Postgres when I started using it. I just didn't complain.
> > +1. Given the prevalence of the pg_foo convention, those names are
> > clunky. So is initdb. I'm less creative than Zdenek, so I'd suggest
> > simply renaming to pg_createuser and friends with the same command
> > line options as the originals. Have the binaries check $0 and emit a
> > warning about using the deprecated name to STDERR if called by a name
> > that doesn't have the pg_ prefix. Default to symlinking the old names
> > for backwards compatibility until 9.0.
It's a lot easier just to prefix the names than to do something
David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to PostgreSQL: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at