Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess seems a tad confused]

> On Mon, 20 Sep 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > I got the final version <24 hours from release.  It was in my tree, but
> > now it isn't, and it isn't in 6.5.2 either.
> > 
> > I asked for the author to verify my work.  I am adding it to the tree
> > now.  What do we do?
> 
> Either make a 6.5.3, inline 6.5.2 (6.5.2a, anyone??) or leave 6.5.2 as is. 
> None is ideal -- although a 6.5.3 is better than a badly broken 6.5.2.  The
> short term solution is for those using 6.5.2 to download the pgaccess-0.98
> tarball from flex.ro.
> 
> I ran across the depopulated pgaccess tree this morning while starting the
> build cycle for the 6.5.2 rpms -- good thing I have already dealt with that
> issue with previous packages.  For the RPM's, it has been practice for some time
> to include the very latest pgaccess as a separate tarball, then untarring it
> over top of the one in the main tarball during the package build.  I was hoping
> to get away from that. ;-(

Yes, I have created a bad situation.  pgaccess it very important for pgsql.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026