please build packages --with-lz4 - Mailing list pgsql-pkg-yum
From | Justin Pryzby |
---|---|
Subject | please build packages --with-lz4 |
Date | |
Msg-id | 20210322020359.GF4203@telsasoft.com Whole thread Raw |
Responses |
Re: please build packages --with-lz4
|
List | pgsql-pkg-yum |
Would you plan to build packages --with-lz4 ? See commit bbe0a81db69bd10bd166907c3701492a29aca294 Allow configurable LZ4 TOAST compression. Also, a reminder about this old thread. The devel packages should be built with a versions like (I think) 0.1.14.0-alpha* postgresql14.x86_64 14-alpha_20210322_PGDG.rhel7 pgdg14-updates-testing On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 11:56:01AM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote: > On Thu, 2019-05-23 at 09:55 -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote: > > > I'm wondering how versioning on PGDG RPMs is intended to work. > > > Yum seems to thinks that the "nightly builds" are of higher version number > > > than beta. > > > [pryzbyj@dev ~]$ yum list --enablerepo='pgdg12-updates-testing' --showdu postgresql12 > > > Installed Packages postgresql12.x86_64 12.0-1devel_20190502_1PGDG.rhel7 @pgdg12-updates-testing > > > Available Packages postgresql12.x86_64 12beta1-1PGDG.rhel7 pgdg12-updates-testing > > On Thu, Jun 06, 2019 at 11:15:58AM +0100, Devrim Gündüz wrote: > > Oops, I did it again :-( Let's review this once we start releasing 13 devel > > RPMs after summer. > > On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 12:24:29AM +0100, Devrim Gündüz wrote: > > On Wed, 2020-04-08 at 10:47 -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote: > > > A reminder about this. > > > The versions should sort like: > > > > > > nightly build < beta < rc < released > > > > Can you please send a patch? > > I'm sorry, but I don't know anything about building RPMs. > > When I mentioned last year, it looked like: > > > postgresql12.x86_64 12.0-1devel_20190502_1PGDG.rhel7 @pgdg12-updates-testing > > > postgresql12.x86_64 12beta1-1PGDG.rhel7 pgdg12-updates-testing > > That's an issue since "12" sorts lower than "12beta1", which means that the > devel => beta upgrade didn't work correctly (I don't remember, but that maybe > also broke the beta/rc => 13.0 release upgrade). > > The curent package looks like: > postgresql13.x86_64 13.0-20200407_devel_1PGDG.rhel7 @pgdg13-updates-testing > > I think that will be an issue again when you release beta1, unless you name it > something weird like 20200601beta1. > > I found: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Versioning/ > |Prerelease versions > |In the Version: tag, use the version that upstream has determined the next release will be. For the field of the Release:tag, use a number of the form "0.N" where N is an integer beginning with 1 and increasing for each revision of thepackage. Prerelease versions MUST use a Release: tag strictly less than 1, as this is the sole indicator that a prereleasehas been packaged. > > So I *think* the devel release should be called something like this with a > leading "0.0": > > postgresql13-13.0.0.20200407git[...] > > And then beta1 can use a leading "0.1" or (according to that doc) "~": > postgresql13-13.0.1.beta1 > postgresql13-13.0~beta1 > > "r" follows "b" so "rc" will work right using the same convention. > postgresql13-13.0.1.rc1 > postgresql13-13.0~rc1 > > And then I think it's finally released as: > postgresql13-13.0 (here, the "release tag" is 1): > > -- > Justin -- Justin Pryzby System Administrator Telsasoft +1-952-707-8581
pgsql-pkg-yum by date: