Re: Adding Oracle Linux to the Linux Download pages
От | Lenz Grimmer |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Adding Oracle Linux to the Linux Download pages |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAJAd_WEEa7mtzUcbMhbp3b=D3ZY-CHNPkJ85W6EdOkWTnW8xxQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Adding Oracle Linux to the Linux Download pages (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Adding Oracle Linux to the Linux Download pages
|
Список | pgsql-www |
On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: > I don't believe it is. I see no problem in adding information about the > Oracle linux distribution, just like we have information about Oracle > Solaris. This is about providing a service to our users, after all. Thank you, I appreciate your support. We have users that contacted us because they want to run newer versions of PostgreSQL on OL. That's why I reached out to this list. > Now if Devrim doesn't want to spend time verifying the packages for Oracle > Linux, that's of course his decision. Absolutely. > But we can certainly list what the distribution default is. But we could then specifically list under the > section of "PostgreSQL Yum Repository" which distributions are supported there. Yes, I think it's fine to make that distinction. The top part of http://www.postgresql.org/download/linux/redhat/ first explains what versions of PG are included by default in which versions of RHEL and its derivatives. It then points to the yum repo, but without making a clear indication which distributions have been tested explicitly (and are thus considered "supported"?). If you go to http://yum.postgresql.org/, it talks about "available platforms", listing RHEL, CentOS and SL (among other RPM-based distros). > (Though in the end I think it would be beneficial to the users if we could > support Oracle Linux as well, its always a matter of resources vs number of > users. There are a lot of debian based distributions that aren't officially > supported by our apt repository either, for example) Right. > In fact, we should probably list that there regardless - so people know > which versions are actually supported by that repository. Should we perhaps > even specifically list which versions of each distro? For the RHEL-based distributions, I think it's sufficient to just state the major version (e.g. RHEL 6, CentOS 6, etc.) - the minor version (e.g. "6.5") just indicates an update release, which is primarily a consolidation of all updates/errate that have accumulated. Each update release within a major release is fully binary compatible (the ABI remains unchanged). A version of PostgreSQL build on RHEL 6.0 will still run on 6.5. Lenz -- Lenz Grimmer <lenz@grimmer.com> - http://www.lenzg.net/
В списке pgsql-www по дате отправления: