Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Don't override arguments set via options with positional argumen
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Don't override arguments set via options with positional argumen |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4F8DFEFA.6080905@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Don't override arguments set via options with positional argumen (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Don't override arguments set via options with positional argumen
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 04/17/2012 07:19 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > On 04/17/2012 07:08 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Andrew Dunstan<andrew@dunslane.net> >> wrote: >>> Don't override arguments set via options with positional arguments. >>> >>> A number of utility programs were rather careless about paremeters >>> that can be set via both an option argument and a positional >>> argument. This leads to results which can violate the Principal >>> Of Least Astonishment. These changes refuse to use positional >>> arguments to override settings that have been made via positional >>> arguments. The changes are backpatched to all live branches. >>> >>> Branch >>> ------ >>> REL8_3_STABLE >> Uh, isn't it kind of a bad idea to back-patch something like this? It >> seems like a behavior change. > > > It was discussed. I think the previous behaviour is a bug. It can't be > sane to be allowed to do: > > initdb -D foo bar > > > You know, I could have sworn it was discussed, but when I look back I see it wasn't. I must have been remembering the recent logging protocol bug. I'll revert it if people want, although I still think it's a bug. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: