Re: [PATCHES] Add PG version number to NLS files

2005-06-27 Thread Martin Pitt
Hi! Peter Eisentraut [2005-06-25 11:29 +0200]: > Am Samstag, 25. Juni 2005 04:24 schrieb Bruce Momjian: > > We absolutely want to support multiple installed versions of PostgreSQL. > > But we don't support installing multiple versions on top of each other, which > is the only scenario where this

Re: [PATCHES] Add PG version number to NLS files

2005-06-25 Thread Bruce Momjian
Martin Pitt wrote: > Hi! > > Peter Eisentraut [2005-06-25 11:29 +0200]: > > Am Samstag, 25. Juni 2005 04:24 schrieb Bruce Momjian: > > > We absolutely want to support multiple installed versions of PostgreSQL. > > > > But we don't support installing multiple versions on top of each other, > > wh

Re: [PATCHES] Add PG version number to NLS files

2005-06-25 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Am Samstag, 25. Juni 2005 04:24 schrieb Bruce Momjian: > >> We absolutely want to support multiple installed versions of PostgreSQL. > > > But we don't support installing multiple versions on top of each other, > > which > > is th

Re: [PATCHES] Add PG version number to NLS files

2005-06-25 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Am Samstag, 25. Juni 2005 04:24 schrieb Bruce Momjian: >> We absolutely want to support multiple installed versions of PostgreSQL. > But we don't support installing multiple versions on top of each other, which > is the only scenario where this patch

Re: [PATCHES] Add PG version number to NLS files

2005-06-25 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Am Samstag, 25. Juni 2005 04:24 schrieb Bruce Momjian: > We absolutely want to support multiple installed versions of PostgreSQL. But we don't support installing multiple versions on top of each other, which is the only scenario where this patch would be useful. ---(end o

Re: [PATCHES] Add PG version number to NLS files

2005-06-24 Thread Bruce Momjian
Martin Pitt wrote: > /usr/lib/libpq3.so: libpq3 > /usr/lib/libpq4.so: libpq4 > /usr/lib/postgresql/7.4/bin/postmaster: postgres-7.4 > /usr/lib/postgresql/8.0/bin/postmaster: postgres-8.0 > /usr/lib/postgresql/7.4/bin/psql: psql-7.4 > /usr/lib/postgresql/8.0/bin/psql: psql-8.0 > [similar for all oth

Re: [PATCHES] Add PG version number to NLS files

2005-06-18 Thread Martin Pitt
Hi! Bruce Momjian [2005-06-15 15:26 -0400]: > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > The 'bind' calles in the binaries are going to look for the proper > > > version. Does that help, or is libpq the only thing we need to > > > handle? > > > > Shared libraries have their version n

Re: [PATCHES] Add PG version number to NLS files

2005-06-15 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Bruce Momjian wrote: > The 'bind' calles in the binaries are going to look for the proper > version. Does that help, or is libpq the only thing we need to > handle? Shared libraries have their version number embedded in the file name for the explicit purpose of installing more than one version s

Re: [PATCHES] Add PG version number to NLS files

2005-06-15 Thread Bruce Momjian
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > The 'bind' calles in the binaries are going to look for the proper > > version. Does that help, or is libpq the only thing we need to > > handle? > > Shared libraries have their version number embedded in the file name for > the explicit purpose

Re: [PATCHES] Add PG version number to NLS files

2005-06-15 Thread Bruce Momjian
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > I have developed the following patch which adds PG_VERSION to the end > > of language-specific file names. > > In my mind, that would only make sense if we added the version number to > all program binaries as well (which we do not, of course).

Re: [PATCHES] Add PG version number to NLS files

2005-06-15 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Bruce Momjian wrote: > I have developed the following patch which adds PG_VERSION to the end > of language-specific file names. In my mind, that would only make sense if we added the version number to all program binaries as well (which we do not, of course). Otherwise, what's the point? -- P