Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] RedHat6.0 & Alpha
Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>
From: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>
To: Ryan Kirkpatrick <rkirkpat@nag.cs.colorado.edu>
Cc: Oliver Elphick <olly@lfix.co.uk>, pgsql-ports@postgreSQL.org, Postgres Hackers List <hackers@postgreSQL.org>, debian-alpha@lists.debian.org
Date: 1999-07-31T02:54:05Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> > I just want to comment on what you are saying about generating a Debian
> > source package. There will be a problem, because you are proposing to
> > provide source that will be different from the main 6.5.1 source; however,
> > the Debian archive assumes that source is identical across all architectures.
The RH RPM distribution has the same constraints. I have hopes that I
can take the v6.5.1 tarball, Ryan's patches, a test on RH Alpha, and
then validate them for the i386 (and sparc, with a volunteer tester)
architectures. If that flys, then perhaps we should commit to a v6.5.2
which *does* contain these changes, but imho we should postpone the
discussion of that until we have shown exactly what it takes.
If validating on i386 succeeds, we can also do a v6.5.1+patches build
of an RPM, and presumably the Debian packaging could work this way
too. So it doesn't absolutely require a commit back to the Postgres
cvs branch if we don't have a consensus on that.
- Thomas
--
Thomas Lockhart lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu
South Pasadena, California