On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 05:52:39PM -0000, Andrew Hammond wrote: > On Jun 5, 9:19 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alvaro Herrera) wrote: > > Zdenek Kotala wrote: > > > Tom Lane wrote: > > > >Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >>Is this a TODO? > > > > > >I don't think so; there is no demand from anybody but Zdenek to remove > > > >those programs. Has it ever even come up before? > > > > Personally I found really strange to have "createuser" and "createdb" > > shipped by Postgres when I started using it. I just didn't complain. > > +1. Given the prevalence of the pg_foo convention, those names are > clunky. So is initdb. I'm less creative than Zdenek, so I'd suggest > simply renaming to pg_createuser and friends with the same command > line options as the originals. Have the binaries check $0 and emit a > warning about using the deprecated name to STDERR if called by a name > that doesn't have the pg_ prefix. Default to symlinking the old names > for backwards compatibility until 9.0.
+1 -- Jim Nasby [EMAIL PROTECTED] EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
pgpFvOvoY19iH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
