Grokbase › Groups › PostgreSQL › pgsql-ports › October 2003
FAQ

On Friday 10 October 2003 08:52 pm, Christopher Browne wrote:
Oops! nand[email protected] ("Nigel J. Andrews") was seen
spray-painting on a wall:
I've not looked at many RPMs but I must say that the few I have have
never been relocatable. Can the postgresql RPMs not be made
relocatable?
Unfortunately, relocation would have to include the init scripts, and
that would be pretty hairy. The notion of "relocatable RPMs" came up
early in its design, but the only case where that will be particularly
usable is if the components are mostly binaries that only make
relative path references. That situation is unusual, to say the
least.
I've been watching this discussion with interest (well, I _am_ the RPM
maintainer, after all) and have to say that it has been thought of before.
It wasn't at that time implemented due to political factors (read: the then
Red Hat maintainer (@redhat.com) refused to include such support even if I
had built it). But I did go through the design phase. If everyone can be
patient, I'll try to go back into my archives and dig out the design doc I
put together way back then. In the meantime, I'd like to hear people's
ideas. As alternatives (debian-style) are fully supported in later Red Hat
(and the new Fedora Core) releases, a scheme that uses alternatives would be
ok.

Be sure to post to the pgsql-ports list instead of pgsql-general, though. If
the list server will accept it, reply-to has been set to pgsql-ports.
--
Lamar Owen
Director of Information Technology
Pisgah Astronomical Research Institute
1 PARI Drive
Rosman, NC 28772
(828)862-5554
www.pari.edu

Search Discussions

  • Andrew Overholt at Oct 22, 2003 at 1:02 pm ⇧
    djee
    Bcc:
    Subject: Re: [PORTS] [GENERAL] Redhat RPMs
    Reply-To: Andrew Overholt <[email protected]>
    In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

    Lamar Owen once said:
    On Friday 10 October 2003 08:52 pm, Christopher Browne wrote:
    Oops! nand[email protected] ("Nigel J. Andrews") was seen
    spray-painting on a wall:
    I've not looked at many RPMs but I must say that the few I have have
    never been relocatable. Can the postgresql RPMs not be made
    relocatable?
    I tried this once but had many issues with initdb and a few others IIRC.
    The locations of data directories and such was being hard-coded in them at
    compile time and I had to do a lot of sed-ing in the specfile to make it
    work. I know I accomplished that but ended up hitting a wall with
    something ... I'll look in my old mail to remind myself what it was.
    It wasn't at that time implemented due to political factors (read: the then
    Red Hat maintainer (@redhat.com) refused to include such support even if I
    I don't think that applies anymore :) David Jee is the current maintainer
    and I'm sure that he'd be open to such suggestions. I've CC'd him.

    Andrew
  • Andrew Overholt at Oct 22, 2003 at 1:08 pm ⇧
    Argh! Sorry about that last mail. The subject line should have been as
    above (not blank). If anyone wants a repost with the proper subject, I'll
    do it.

    Andrew
  • Fernando Nasser at Oct 22, 2003 at 6:07 pm ⇧

    Andrew Overholt wrote:
    djee
    Bcc:
    Subject: Re: [PORTS] [GENERAL] Redhat RPMs
    Reply-To: Andrew Overholt <[email protected]>
    In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

    Lamar Owen once said:
    On Friday 10 October 2003 08:52 pm, Christopher Browne wrote:

    Oops! nand[email protected] ("Nigel J. Andrews") was seen
    spray-painting on a wall:
    I've not looked at many RPMs but I must say that the few I have have
    never been relocatable. Can the postgresql RPMs not be made
    relocatable?
    I tried this once but had many issues with initdb and a few others IIRC.
    The locations of data directories and such was being hard-coded in them at
    compile time and I had to do a lot of sed-ing in the specfile to make it
    work. I know I accomplished that but ended up hitting a wall with
    something ... I'll look in my old mail to remind myself what it was.
    If we go with the Debian proposal of a specific package name for each
    version that has a different catalog version (needs pg_dump +
    pg_restore) and multiple versions installed we can basically eliminate
    this. The paths provided to configure in each of these packages will
    have a different base directory, which includes the version, so each
    package will be a 'normal' package, not a relocatable one.



    --
    Fernando Nasser
    Red Hat Canada Ltd. E-Mail: [email protected]
    2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300
    Toronto, Ontario M4P 2C9

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
grouppgsql-ports @
categoriespostgresql
postedOct 14, '03 at 5:15p
activeOct 22, '03 at 6:07p
posts4
users3
websitepostgresql.org
irc#postgresql

3 users in discussion

Andrew Overholt: 2 posts Fernando Nasser: 1 post Lamar Owen: 1 post

Content

People

Support

Translate

site design / logo © 2023 Grokbase