On 09/20/2010 08:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Stefan Kaltenbrunner<ste...@kaltenbrunner.cc> writes:
On 09/20/2010 08:21 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Well, I'm testing with an unmodified copy of 1.12.13, and I got output
matching our historical tarballs. So I'm blaming debian for this one.
As far as I know magnus is using a debian based CVS server for his
testing so that would certainly be 1.12.x - are you too?
No server anywhere: I'm reading from a local repository which is a
tarball copy of the one on cvs.postgresql.org. 1.12.13 is the only
version in question. (I believe Magnus is not using a server either;
the cvs2git documentation says that it will only work from a local repo,
and even if that's not true I shudder to think how long it would take
over a network.)
http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/info-cvs/2004-07/msg00106.html
is what I'm refering too and what the debian people provided a patch to
work around for(starting with1:1.12.9-17 in 2005) - nut sure why you are
not seeing it...
Stefan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
