Naming of postgresql & related

[Daniel J. Luke]

On Nov 4, 2006, at 6:39 AM, Jyrki Wahlstedt wrote:
> I just wonder about naming postgresql, some other ports could have  
> the same. Currently postgresql installs v.7.4.12. Then we have  
> postgresql7 (v.7.4.13), postgresql8 (v.8.1.3) and postgresql81 (v. 
> 8.1.4). This is a mess. I think postgresql should always be the  
> latest, then we could, if we want, to have version-specific ports  
> (~7, ~8, ~81). How about this?

This was changed because people do 'port upgrade' and wanted things  
to work. And because of your point below, the easiest thing is to  
just have version-specific ports (and let the user handle the file  
format incompatible upgrades themselves).

I believe the 'postgresql' port was deprecated when the decision was  
made and that it was intended for it to be removed (but I could  
remember incorrectly).

> The related thing comes from the fact that the database formats  
> between point versions of postgresql are not compatible (8.0->8.1).  
> Is there a way to make sure that database is dumped before upgrade.

That is probably possible, but I don't know if it makes sense to  
attempt this (for instance, I have a database that would take days to  
dump that contains data that I'm happy to toss when I want to do an  
upgrade, but the upgrade step can't know that).

Also, 'upgrade' isn't really a normal target, so it would be a hack  
in the portfile to attempt to do this.

> Could one ask a question from the user and wait for an answer (to  
> confirm the operation)?

No. Ports don't prompt for things - this would break unattended  
(scripted) operation.

--
Daniel J. Luke
+========================================================+
| *---------------- dluke at geeklair.net ----------------* |
| *-------------- http://www.geeklair.net -------------* |
+========================================================+
|   Opinions expressed are mine and do not necessarily   |
|          reflect the opinions of my employer.          |
+========================================================+


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-dev/attachments/20061104/46e2c65f/PGP.bin