Andrew Gierth <and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk> writes: > "Tom" == Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > Tom> I concur with Michael that there's value in exposing the version > Tom> number in the numeric form used by PG_VERSION_NUM. However, I > Tom> also concur with Andrew that if the use-case for this is > Tom> Makefiles, pg_config is a pretty poor transmission mechanism. We > Tom> should instead add PG_VERSION_NUM to the version variables set in > Tom> Makefile.global.
> I think there's an argument for both. pg_config already has a VERSION= > string in the output, and I think adding a VERSION_NUM= would be good > for consistency there. And people definitely do want to do version > comparisons in makefiles... Hm. We're all agreed that there's a use case for exposing PG_VERSION_NUM to the makefiles, but I did not hear one for adding it to pg_config; and doing the former takes about two lines whereas adding a pg_config option entails quite a lot of overhead (documentation, translatable help text, yadda yadda). So I'm not in favor of doing the latter without a much more solid case than has been made. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers