Re: [HACKERS] Request for a "force interactive mode" flag (-I) for psql

2005-10-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
John DeSoi wrote: > > On Oct 13, 2005, at 4:42 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > I haven't seen any replies to this, so I guess you are left with > > either > > hacking psql yourself or getting Cygwin folks to fix it. Sorry. > > I have asked for this also. It would make it much easier to control

Re: [HACKERS] Request for a "force interactive mode" flag (-I) for psql

2005-10-14 Thread John DeSoi
On Oct 13, 2005, at 4:42 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: I haven't seen any replies to this, so I guess you are left with either hacking psql yourself or getting Cygwin folks to fix it. Sorry. I have asked for this also. It would make it much easier to control psql from other applications. ht

Re: [HACKERS] Request for a "force interactive mode" flag (-I) for psql

2005-10-13 Thread Bruce Momjian
I haven't seen any replies to this, so I guess you are left with either hacking psql yourself or getting Cygwin folks to fix it. Sorry. --- Bill Bartlett wrote: > Back in 2003 Bruce Momjian proposed adding a flag (-I) to ps

[HACKERS] Request for a "force interactive mode" flag (-I) for psql

2005-09-30 Thread Bill Bartlett
Back in 2003 Bruce Momjian proposed adding a flag (-I) to psql to force it into "interactive" mode. (See http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2003-11/msg00013.php for the thread.) The proposal was rejected because there was no proven need for it at that time. I'd like to raise this propos