Andrew Dunstan wrote: > Peter Eisentraut said: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> I doubt it. People can always just read the file to see what > >> settings are in it, and it's not like nonexperts are going to have a > >> variety of different configurations that we're gonna have to ask them > >> about. (Even in the Unix world, pg_config is not really needed when > >> most people are installing one of a small number of RPM-type > >> packages...) > > ISTM that if it's not useful we should rip it out and if it is then we > should make it portable.
Agreed. Right now we have a shell script in the Win32 binary directory that doesn't work for them. > > The point of pg_config is not primarily to debug the installation > > layout for us. pg_config is used in configure scripts to find > > PostgreSQL libraries and header files. > > To that extent is it not broken by relocated installations that we have now > made some provision for? Good question. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
