Re: Updated: postgresql-7.2-2

Re: Updated: postgresql-7.2-2

[Jonathan Kamens]

>  Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 08:10:00 -0500
>  From: Jason Tishler <jason@tishler.net>
>  
>  <!!!!! WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING !!!!!!>
>  
>  Note that this distribution will *not* function correctly with Cygwin
>  1.3.9-1.  If you want to use this distribution, then you *must* upgrade
>  your Cygwin DLL to a recent snapshot (i.e., 2002-Feb-10 or later) or to
>  the next release after 1.3.9-1 (when available).
>  
>  </!!!!! WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING !!!!!!>

This seems like a singularly bad idea.  This means that if someone
downloads setup.exe from the Cygwin site and installs a bunch of
packages from scratch including postgresql, it won't work.  Blech.

Couldn't the postgresql update have waited until after a new version
of the DLL was released?

  jik

Re: Updated: postgresql-7.2-2

[Earnie Boyd]

Jonathan Kamens wrote:
> 
> >  Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 08:10:00 -0500
> >  From: Jason Tishler <jason@tishler.net>
> >
> >  <!!!!! WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING !!!!!!>
> >
> >  Note that this distribution will *not* function correctly with Cygwin
> >  1.3.9-1.  If you want to use this distribution, then you *must* upgrade
> >  your Cygwin DLL to a recent snapshot (i.e., 2002-Feb-10 or later) or to
> >  the next release after 1.3.9-1 (when available).
> >
> >  </!!!!! WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING !!!!!!>
> 
> This seems like a singularly bad idea.  This means that if someone
> downloads setup.exe from the Cygwin site and installs a bunch of
> packages from scratch including postgresql, it won't work.  Blech.
> 
> Couldn't the postgresql update have waited until after a new version
> of the DLL was released?
> 

I agree with Jonathan.  Even a test package should work with the
existing DLL.  If you wish to distribute privately for those who want
bleeding edge then that would be ok.  A package that is dependent on
something outside of what setup can deliver should always be rejected
for distribution by those controlling package distribution.  Perhaps a
rule to see the Cygwin Announcement as well as the setup.hint should
also be enforced.

Earnie.

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: Updated: postgresql-7.2-2

[Jason Tishler]

Jonathan,

On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 12:46:40PM -0500, Jonathan Kamens wrote:
> >  Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 08:10:00 -0500
> >  From: Jason Tishler <jason@tishler.net>
> >  
> >  <!!!!! WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING !!!!!!>
> >  
> >  Note that this distribution will *not* function correctly with Cygwin
> >  1.3.9-1.  If you want to use this distribution, then you *must* upgrade
> >  your Cygwin DLL to a recent snapshot (i.e., 2002-Feb-10 or later) or to
> >  the next release after 1.3.9-1 (when available).
> >  
> >  </!!!!! WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING !!!!!!>
> 
> This seems like a singularly bad idea.  This means that if someone
> downloads setup.exe from the Cygwin site and installs a bunch of
> packages from scratch including postgresql, it won't work.  Blech.

Maybe I should just mark postgresql-7.2-2 as "test" and be done with it?

> Couldn't the postgresql update have waited until after a new version
> of the DLL was released?

Yes, I could have waited.  And yes, I did think about this issue.
Unfortunately, I was trying to make everyone happy and I appear to have
made no one happy (especially myself).

This is how I see it:  For those not using PostgreSQL, this is
a non-issue.  For those who are, they probably want the latest and
greatest so they will be willing to upgrade their DLL to a snapshot.
If not, then they can just stick with (or downgrade to) 7.1.3-2.

Jason

Re: Updated: postgresql-7.2-2

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 01:10:01PM -0500, Jason Tishler wrote:
> Maybe I should just mark postgresql-7.2-2 as "test" and be done with it?

Sounds like a good idea.  Unfortunately I didn't read the whole
announcement before accepting it so it's also my fault.

Sorry,
Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer                                mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com
Red Hat, Inc.

Re: Updated: postgresql-7.2-2

[Jason Tishler]

Corinna,

On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 07:16:56PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 01:10:01PM -0500, Jason Tishler wrote:
> > Maybe I should just mark postgresql-7.2-2 as "test" and be done with it?
> 
> Sounds like a good idea.

I just marked postgresql-7.2-2 as "test" -- hopefully, this is sufficient.

> Unfortunately I didn't read the whole announcement before accepting
> it so it's also my fault.

Thanks for trying to take some of the "blame," but it is really my fault
for jumping the gun.  I was just trying to circumvent those "Package foo
was released yesterday, why isn't the Cygwin package ready yet?" posts.

Jason

Re: Updated: postgresql-7.2-2

[Christopher Faylor]

On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 01:48:17PM -0500, Jason Tishler wrote:
>Corinna,
>
>On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 07:16:56PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 01:10:01PM -0500, Jason Tishler wrote:
>> > Maybe I should just mark postgresql-7.2-2 as "test" and be done with it?
>> 
>> Sounds like a good idea.
>
>I just marked postgresql-7.2-2 as "test" -- hopefully, this is sufficient.
>
>> Unfortunately I didn't read the whole announcement before accepting
>> it so it's also my fault.
>
>Thanks for trying to take some of the "blame," but it is really my fault
>for jumping the gun.  I was just trying to circumvent those "Package foo
>was released yesterday, why isn't the Cygwin package ready yet?" posts.

FWIW, I have no problem releasing 1.3.10.  I just need confirmation from
Corinna that it is stable.

Has anyone run the cygwin test suite on a recent Cygwin from CVS?

cgf

Re: Updated: postgresql-7.2-2

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 01:54:35PM -0500, Chris Faylor wrote:
> FWIW, I have no problem releasing 1.3.10.  I just need confirmation from
> Corinna that it is stable.

I can't.  The state of the changes to use the new __uid16_t, gid_16_t
and off32_t datatypes is finished and the new big datatypes aren't
used yet so I *assume* it's still as stable as 1.3.9 was.  It's
running on one of my Windows boxes and it still seem to run, FWIW.

Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer                                mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com
Red Hat, Inc.