Re: [HACKERS] v7.2.3 - tag'd, packaged ... need it checked ...
Marc G. Fournier writes: > On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > > Marc G. Fournier writes: > > > > > Looks good from my end, Peter, I pulled the same docs that I pulled for > > > v7.2.2, which I hope is okay? > > > > Probably not, because the version number needs to be changed and they need > > to be rebuilt for each release. > > should I run the same 'gmake docs' then, as I've been doing for the > snapshot(s)? src/tools/RELEASE_CHANGES contains all the places where the version number needs to be changed. (Actually, I should eliminate some of these places, but that won't help now.) After that you can build the docs using doc/src$ gmake postgres.tar.gz doc/src$ mv postgres.tar.gz .. and copy man.tar.gz from the ftp site (since it doesn't change) to doc/. After that, 'make dist'. -- Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] v7.2.3 - tag'd, packaged ... need it checked ...
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Marc G. Fournier writes: > > > Looks good from my end, Peter, I pulled the same docs that I pulled for > > v7.2.2, which I hope is okay? > > Probably not, because the version number needs to be changed and they need > to be rebuilt for each release. should I run the same 'gmake docs' then, as I've been doing for the snapshot(s)? ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] v7.2.3 - tag'd, packaged ... need it checked ...
Marc G. Fournier writes: > Looks good from my end, Peter, I pulled the same docs that I pulled for > v7.2.2, which I hope is okay? Probably not, because the version number needs to be changed and they need to be rebuilt for each release. -- Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [HACKERS] v7.2.3 - tag'd, packaged ... need it checked ...
On Thursday 03 October 2002 12:29 am, Lamar Owen wrote: > RPMs will be uploaded either tonight or tomorrow morning after I get to > work; it will depend on how much upload bandwidth I can get out of this > dialup. It appears to be running OK, so I may let it run. RPMS uploaded into the usual place, so the announcement can take that into account, Marc. -- Lamar Owen WGCR Internet Radio 1 Peter 4:11 ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [HACKERS] v7.2.3 - tag'd, packaged ... need it checked ...
Lamar Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Builds fine here for RPM usage. Got an odd diff in the triggers regression > test: did we drop a NOTICE? If so, the regression output should probably > have been changed too. No, we didn't change anything, and the 7.2 regression tests passed for me on Tuesday. Please investigate more closely. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [HACKERS] v7.2.3 - tag'd, packaged ... need it checked ...
On Thursday 03 October 2002 12:29 am, Lamar Owen wrote: > RPMs will be uploaded either tonight or tomorrow morning after I get to > work; it will depend on how much upload bandwidth I can get out of this > dialup. It appears to be running OK, so I may let it run. After I get to work. Too many disconnects; too low a throughput. -- Lamar Owen WGCR Internet Radio 1 Peter 4:11 ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [HACKERS] v7.2.3 - tag'd, packaged ... need it checked ...
On Wednesday 02 October 2002 11:52 pm, Tom Lane wrote: > "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Looks good from my end, Peter, I pulled the same docs that I pulled for > > v7.2.2, which I hope is okay? > Sources look okay from here. Didn't look at the built-docs files. Builds fine here for RPM usage. Got an odd diff in the triggers regression test: did we drop a NOTICE? If so, the regression output should probably have been changed too. The diff: *** ./expected/triggers.out Sat Jan 15 14:18:23 2000 --- ./results/triggers.out Thu Oct 3 00:16:09 2002 *** *** 75,91 insert into fkeys values (60, '6', 4); ERROR: check_fkeys_pkey2_exist: tuple references non-existing key in fkeys2 delete from pkeys where pkey1 = 30 and pkey2 = '3'; - NOTICE: check_pkeys_fkey_cascade: 1 tuple(s) of fkeys are deleted ERROR: check_fkeys2_fkey_restrict: tuple referenced in fkeys delete from pkeys where pkey1 = 40 and pkey2 = '4'; - NOTICE: check_pkeys_fkey_cascade: 1 tuple(s) of fkeys are deleted - NOTICE: check_pkeys_fkey_cascade: 1 tuple(s) of fkeys2 are deleted update pkeys set pkey1 = 7, pkey2 = '70' where pkey1 = 50 and pkey2 = '5'; - NOTICE: check_pkeys_fkey_cascade: 1 tuple(s) of fkeys are deleted ERROR: check_fkeys2_fkey_restrict: tuple referenced in fkeys update pkeys set pkey1 = 7, pkey2 = '70' where pkey1 = 10 and pkey2 = '1'; - NOTICE: check_pkeys_fkey_cascade: 1 tuple(s) of fkeys are deleted - NOTICE: check_pkeys_fkey_cascade: 1 tuple(s) of fkeys2 are deleted DROP TABLE pkeys; DROP TABLE fkeys; DROP TABLE fkeys2; --- 75,85 Tom, the timestamp and horology passes on RH 7.3 here. Which is nice. Will try 8.0 tomorrow at work. RPMs will be uploaded either tonight or tomorrow morning after I get to work; it will depend on how much upload bandwidth I can get out of this dialup. It appears to be running OK, so I may let it run. -- Lamar Owen WGCR Internet Radio 1 Peter 4:11 ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
Re: [HACKERS] v7.2.3 - tag'd, packaged ... need it checked ...
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Looks good from my end, Peter, I pulled the same docs that I pulled for > v7.2.2, which I hope is okay? Sources look okay from here. Didn't look at the built-docs files. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
