Lamar Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Oleg announced the new intarray in this message:
> http://fts.postgresql.org/db/mw/msg.html?mid=120655 and there was
> discussion following. But I don't see this version in CURRENT CVS???
I believe the state of play is that we have some catalog-changing w
Lamar Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Friday 20 July 2001 11:24, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Let me add that Red Hat is now distributing a different RPM with their
> > Red Hat Database, or at least I think they are. Can someone confirm?
>
> Trond may be able to.
The rpms of the Red Hat data
On Friday 20 July 2001 10:05, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Tom Lane writes:
> > ISTM that it'd be a good thing if current versions of all the add-on
> > source files for both Debian and RedHat RPMs were part of our CVS tree
> If you want to take the job of keeping these up to date or the job of
> co
> Deja vu... didn't we have this discussion a month or two back?? :-) (
> http://fts.postgresql.org/db/mw/msg.html?mid=115437#thread )
>
> I'm all for it for the RPM's, at least, if others are game. We left off with
> the question of where it would best be stored
>
> There is, in fact, an
> Tom Lane writes:
>
> > ISTM that it'd be a good thing if current versions of all the add-on
> > source files for both Debian and RedHat RPMs were part of our CVS tree
>
> If you want to take the job of keeping these up to date or the job of
> convincing all the 143 package developers out there
On Wednesday 18 July 2001 10:42 pm, Tom Lane wrote:
> Lamar Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > While I understand Oliver's reasons for having the Debian stuff on the
> > debian server, I believe it would be appropriate to have the patchfile
> > and the various Debian README's available on the ma
will trillich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> $ psql -V
> No database specified
This seems awfully fishy, since (a) there is no such error message
anywhere in 7.1, and (b) I don't get that behavior out of 7.1:
$ ~postgres/version71/bin/psql -V
psql (PostgreSQL) 7.1.2
contains readline, history sup
On Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 11:57:35AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> will trillich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > $ psql -V
> > No database specified
>
> This seems awfully fishy, since (a) there is no such error message
> anywhere in 7.1, and (b) I don't get that behavior out of 7.1:
>
> $ ~postgres/ve
On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 09:26:02PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> will trillich writes:
>
> > in the old days (7.0.3) i could list databases via
> >
> > psql -l
> >
> > but these days (7.1) i must
> >
> > psql -l [-d] nameOfADatabaseFromPreordainedKnowledge
> >
> > probably because of s
will trillich writes:
> in the old days (7.0.3) i could list databases via
>
> psql -l
>
> but these days (7.1) i must
>
> psql -l [-d] nameOfADatabaseFromPreordainedKnowledge
>
> probably because of some fuxnored setting. but which?
Evidence please?
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PR
10 matches
Mail list logo
