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