Ready for RC1?

Started by Tom Lanealmost 24 years ago8 messages
#1Tom Lane
tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us

AFAIK we are go for 7.2RC1.

regards, tom lane

#2Marc G. Fournier
scrappy@hub.org
In reply to: Tom Lane (#1)
Re: Ready for RC1?

Yup, going to bundle her first thing when I get up tomorrow (or, rather,
later today, looking at the time *grin*)

On Sat, 19 Jan 2002, Tom Lane wrote:

Show quoted text

AFAIK we are go for 7.2RC1.

regards, tom lane

#3Brent Verner
brent@rcfile.org
In reply to: Marc G. Fournier (#2)
Re: Ready for RC1?

[2002-01-19 01:34] Marc G. Fournier said:
|
| Yup, going to bundle her first thing when I get up tomorrow (or, rather,
| later today, looking at the time *grin*)

Is this rolled yet? I haven't seen it in any mirrors and haven't
been able to get on ftp.postgresql.org (which I assume is ftp master).

thanks.
brent

--
"Develop your talent, man, and leave the world something. Records are
really gifts from people. To think that an artist would love you enough
to share his music with anyone is a beautiful thing." -- Duane Allman

#4Marc G. Fournier
scrappy@hub.org
In reply to: Brent Verner (#3)
Re: Ready for RC1?

On Mon, 21 Jan 2002, Brent Verner wrote:

[2002-01-19 01:34] Marc G. Fournier said:
|
| Yup, going to bundle her first thing when I get up tomorrow (or, rather,
| later today, looking at the time *grin*)

Is this rolled yet? I haven't seen it in any mirrors and haven't
been able to get on ftp.postgresql.org (which I assume is ftp master).

No ... I've held off waiting on a resolution of the problem that Tom Lane
brought up with the RTLD_* stuff, since if any changes in there are going
in, they should be done *at least* before RC1 ...

#5Peter Eisentraut
peter_e@gmx.net
In reply to: Marc G. Fournier (#4)
Re: Ready for RC1?

Marc G. Fournier writes:

No ... I've held off waiting on a resolution of the problem that Tom Lane
brought up with the RTLD_* stuff, since if any changes in there are going
in, they should be done *at least* before RC1 ...

We're not doing that in this release, AFAIK.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net

#6Marc G. Fournier
scrappy@hub.org
In reply to: Peter Eisentraut (#5)
Re: Ready for RC1?

Tom, can you confirm that you don't want to do this for at least the Linux
case? If not, will roll her ...

On Mon, 21 Jan 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

Show quoted text

Marc G. Fournier writes:

No ... I've held off waiting on a resolution of the problem that Tom Lane
brought up with the RTLD_* stuff, since if any changes in there are going
in, they should be done *at least* before RC1 ...

We're not doing that in this release, AFAIK.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net

#7Tom Lane
tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us
In reply to: Marc G. Fournier (#4)
Re: Ready for RC1?

"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes:

No ... I've held off waiting on a resolution of the problem that Tom Lane
brought up with the RTLD_* stuff, since if any changes in there are going
in, they should be done *at least* before RC1 ...

I think the consensus is that we should not risk the RTLD_* change now.

I put in a Makefile hack to cure the immediate issue with Red Hat's Tcl
RPMs, so I think we're good to go on RC1.

regards, tom lane

#8Tom Lane
tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us
In reply to: Marc G. Fournier (#6)
Re: Ready for RC1?

"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes:

Tom, can you confirm that you don't want to do this for at least the Linux
case? If not, will roll her ...

Yes, I think we should sit tight on this for 7.2. There seemed to be
some people arguing that RTLD_LAZY might be better; I disagree, but
will not force the issue until the argument is settled. Let's roll...

regards, tom lane