[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Actualized PostgreSQL 7.2 packages?



*sigh* the things I don't know...

Tom

Brett Parker wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 10:57:41AM +1030, Tom Cook wrote:
> > Kerstin Hoef-Emden wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On 16 Feb 2002, Guille -bisho- wrote:
> > >
> > > > There are RPM packages but no debs even in unstable, and I need some of
> > > > the new features. :(
> > >
> > > Compilation of the tarballs from www.postgresql.org worked on my machine
> > > and I am running an alpha, which frequently suffers from problems
> > > during compilation.
> >
> > Yeah, recompiling 7.2 on my intel box worked fine also.  Why do you need
> > 7.2?  The only significant things I can see added are
> > internationalisation and VACUUMing.  Your English seems pretty adequate,
> > and a DB will probably live without VACUUMing until the debs come
> > out...  and there are 7.1.3 debs in woody.  They have all the
> > SQL-compliance stuff that 6.3 lacked (foreign key relationships, some tx
> > fixes etc. IIRC).
> >
> > Mind you, 7.1.3 won't install on potato (wants newer libc and a whole
> > stack of other stuff) so I had to recompile to get the extras (I really
> > needed foreign key relationships).  Try recompiling; it's not that hard.
> >
> > Tom
> 
> hrm... except from the backport available at:
> # - pg
> deb http://people.debian.org/~elphick/postgresql/pg7.1/potato/ ./
> 
> obviously!
> 
> But then, I'm a strange stable user with slightly more backports on this
> box than I care to mention (including some home grown from source in
> unstable, including a newer version of postfix, which I needed for my
> place of employment as the older postfix was *massively* outdated, and
> its ETRN support was *BAD*).
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Brett Parker
>         now drinking belgian beer and getting quite drunk after a hard day at
>         the office.
> 
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>    Part 1.2Type: application/pgp-signature



Reply to: