Re: [PORTS] RedHat6.0 & Alpha

> OK, I'm trying to do this to help the Alpha folks, in such a way that
> it helps the Alpha-linux-RH folks to get RPMs also. Having a 6.5.2

[snip]

> point out that I offered to our RedHat contacts to try to marshall an
> Alpha-ready build, but so far it's like herding cats.

> And *really*, if we have 3.5MB of diffs, who are we kidding about
> knowing where they all came from and what they are doing? Backpatching
> or developing patches on a clean 6.5.1 release is the only thing to do
> for a 6.5.2. Otherwise, call it 6.6-prealpha and we'll wait 4 months
> for RPMs.

> My $0.03 ;)

I second this.  In the last few months, PostgreSQL has really been
making progress in the mindshare area -- once, what was written off as
being unreliable, buggy, and slow, not to mention feature-lean, is now
being touted by many as "commercial quality", "the Free Software
equivalent to Oracle", "stable", "reliable", and "fast".

I'm all for having the latest and greatest snapshots working on the
Alpha -- Woo Hoo, etc, etc.  I'm all for the current CVS tree building
like a champ on Alpha -- this is good stuff.  HOWEVER, if there is a
need for a 6.5.x running on Alpha, then 6.5.1 needs to get the Alpha
patches (possibly a few other reliability patches -- but, keep the
number of patches down to a minimum -- this is still a 6.5.x release --
bug fixing only.) for a 6.5.2, where the advertised bugfixes include the
long-awaited Alpha patches.

For goodness sakes, Alpha is a major architecture -- this needs to be
done right.  Make the number of possible variables a minimum -- let's
get a patch set working that applies to virgin 6.5.1.  If backporting
and backpatching is required to do this, in the name of ROBUSTNESS -- by
all means -- let's do it.

(I say all this after Thomas had to "slap me around" a little -- I have
been getting the cart before the horse on some of the RPM issues, and
needed a good reminder of just what kind of software package I'm working
on! This is an RDBMS -- people will be using this for major data -- like
the guy from Australia who e-mailed here not long ago about 6.5 vs
6.4.2, and mentioned that his database had a few MILLION rows -- did
anybody catch the significance of that? (Wayne Pierkarski from
senet.com.au) Thanks for the wakeup call, Thomas.)

Thanks and kudos go the the guys who have made the Alpha port work --
now, let's get a patch set against 6.5.1 that works -- if that proves
too difficult, we'll just have to wait until pre-6.6, as Thomas already
said.

PostgreSQL is kicking major tuples -- let's keep it that way....

My 1.5 cents...

Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio