Re: [HACKERS] Releasing 7.4.3 ...

2004-06-14 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004, Tom Lane wrote: Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: The INSTALL file looks quite bad. It's clearly been freshly generated. The formatting does seem worse than in previous versions, but it's not so bad I'd want to hold up the release to fix it. My guess is that the "wr

Re: [HACKERS] Releasing 7.4.3 ...

2004-06-14 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: > My guess is that the "wrong" version of lynx is being used to build it. > I remember being dissatisfied with the output of developer.pg.org's > version of lynx back when we were making this file manually. > (The version I have here is 2.8.5rel.1 (04 Feb 2004) and it seems to > do fine.)

Re: [HACKERS] Releasing 7.4.3 ...

2004-06-14 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The INSTALL file looks quite bad. It's clearly been freshly generated. The formatting does seem worse than in previous versions, but it's not so bad I'd want to hold up the release to fix it. My guess is that the "wrong" version of lynx is being use

Re: [HACKERS] Releasing 7.4.3 ...

2004-06-13 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Sun, 13 Jun 2004, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > Marc G. Fournier wrote: > >> Anyone else, please test the tar ball for any bug/nits ... > >> specifically, Peter, can you check that I've built/included the > >> right documentation? > > > > Try reading the list of supported

Re: [HACKERS] Releasing 7.4.3 ...

2004-06-13 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Sun, 13 Jun 2004, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Marc G. Fournier wrote: Anyone else, please test the tar ball for any bug/nits ... specifically, Peter, can you check that I've built/included the right documentation? Try reading the list of supported platforms at the bottom of the INSTALL file... k, an

Re: [HACKERS] Releasing 7.4.3 ...

2004-06-13 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Bruce Momjian wrote: >> Removing README.CVS from the tarball is something Marc handles, as >> far as I know. I just added it to CVS and never worked on having it >> removed from the tarballs. > I've added a rule to remove README.CVS when making a dist

Re: [HACKERS] Releasing 7.4.3 ...

2004-06-13 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > Anyone else, please test the tar ball for any bug/nits ... > specifically, Peter, can you check that I've built/included the right > documentation? Try reading the list of supported platforms at the bottom of the INSTALL file... ---(end of broad

Re: [HACKERS] Releasing 7.4.3 ...

2004-06-13 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Bruce Momjian wrote: > Removing README.CVS from the tarball is something Marc handles, as > far as I know. I just added it to CVS and never worked on having it > removed from the tarballs. I've added a rule to remove README.CVS when making a distribution. But I seem to be missing any rules to bu

Re: [HACKERS] Releasing 7.4.3 ...

2004-06-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Anyone else, please test the tar ball for any bug/nits ... > > README.CVS is not supposed to appear in the tarball --- whatever Bruce > thought he did to remove it is not working ... Removing README.CVS from the tarball is somet

Re: [HACKERS] Releasing 7.4.3 ...

2004-06-12 Thread Tom Lane
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Anyone else, please test the tar ball for any bug/nits ... README.CVS is not supposed to appear in the tarball --- whatever Bruce thought he did to remove it is not working ... regards, tom lane ---(