Re: [HACKERS] pg_config --version-num
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] pg_config --version-num |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAB7nPqQnTr9zZnFGY34i4cSTw5KHzU-Uv40PtfiH1uoNdiZm7w@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | [HACKERS] pg_config --version-num (Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] pg_config --version-num
Re: [HACKERS] pg_config --version-num |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 6:14 PM, Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Attached is a small patch to teach pg_config how to output a --version-num > > With Pg 10, parsing versions got more annoying. Especially with > "10beta1", "9.6beta2" etc into the mix. It makes no sense to force > tools and scripts to do this when we can just expose a sensible > pre-formatted one at no cost to us. > > Personally I'd like to backpatch this into supported back branches, > but just having it in pg 10 would be a help. The last threads treating about the same subject are here: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAB7nPqTAdAJpX8iK4V3uYJbO2Kmo8rHzqJKDsLaDdranNrGX_A@mail.gmail.com https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20161127001648.GA21874@fetter.org Is the data in Makefile.global unsufficient? -- Michael
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: