Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >> I've always assumed that I'm supposed to backpatch the bugs I fix in
> >> HEAD, however far is reasonable.
>
> > I thought we only backatched major bugs to prevent possible instability
> > when fixing minor
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> I've always assumed that I'm supposed to backpatch the bugs I fix in
>> HEAD, however far is reasonable.
> I thought we only backatched major bugs to prevent possible instability
> when fixing minor bugs.
Actually, Bruce, this *
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> > > Why do we need someone to complain? We know the bug is there. Has the
> > > code changed a lot in that area?
> >
> > Do we have the policy of backpatching every fix? I thought it was only
> > the major bugs we fixed
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Why do we need someone to complain? We know the bug is there. Has the
> > code changed a lot in that area?
>
> Do we have the policy of backpatching every fix? I thought it was only
> the major bugs we fixed in back branches. If someone wants t
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I am attaching a minimal patch that will fix the bug in back branches.
> Keep in mind that a patched pg_ctl will not be able to restart a backend
> that was not patched.
I think this patch will work for unpatched backends as well. I am still
uncertain if it should be backp
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > > > "", meaning zero-length string. I should have seen the bug when I
> > > > > applied the contributed patch in 2004.
> > > >
> > > > So, shouldn't this fix be back-patched?
> > >
> > > Well, no one has actually complained about the breakage, and it has been
> > > a f
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > However, as of 2004-10-15, this has not worked. :-( The attached patch
> > > > is the one that caused the bug --- on non-Unix systems, SYSTEMQUOTE is
> > > > "", meaning zero-l
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > However, as of 2004-10-15, this has not worked. :-( The attached patch
> > > is the one that caused the bug --- on non-Unix systems, SYSTEMQUOTE is
> > > "", meaning zero-length string. I should have seen
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > However, as of 2004-10-15, this has not worked. :-( The attached patch
> > is the one that caused the bug --- on non-Unix systems, SYSTEMQUOTE is
> > "", meaning zero-length string. I should have seen the bug when I
> > applied the
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> However, as of 2004-10-15, this has not worked. :-( The attached patch
> is the one that caused the bug --- on non-Unix systems, SYSTEMQUOTE is
> "", meaning zero-length string. I should have seen the bug when I
> applied the contributed patch in 2004.
10 matches
Mail list logo
