Mario Jorge Nunes Filipe wrote: >Once again I'm here to talk about Postgres. > >It was suggested previously that a new package to exist should be >created using libc6. But (and correct me if i'm wrong) libc6 will only >be final with hamm, so it might make some sense to create a package >still using libc5 and maybe another one with libc6. What do you think >about this ? > Since I'm on unstable, I don't personally need a libc5 copy. My own efforts are concentrated on trying to find the date problem which appears to come from the change to libc6. Once I solve that, I'll release a package for hamm, since Siggy Bentrup appears to have left the scene. (He hasn't responded to my email at all.) Unfortunately, most PostgreSQL developers aren't using the new libc, so it may take a while.
>Another question relates to the process of upgrading, wich for what i >could gather is just a process of dumping the db and reloading. Unfortunately, it's not quite as simple as that: Bear in mind that you will need to dump postgres95 data using its own version of pg_dumpall; this will probably fail to preserve SQL permissions. Also, reloading will fail if any column names are reserved words or in mixed case, since PostgreSQL 6.2 is more restrictive in both cases. I think that the old and new versions ought to be made to conflict; the user should dump his old data and restore it manually. If you try to automate this, it is likely to give someone a false sense of security and end up going horribly wrong. -- Oliver Elphick [EMAIL PROTECTED] Isle of Wight http://lfix.co.uk/oliver PGP key from public servers; key ID 32B8FAA1 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
