Didn't we want to remove that option?

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net


Sat, 7 Sep 2002 18:23:52 +0200 (CEST)
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
--with-maxbackends
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Didn't we want to remove that option?

I didn't know it was still in there.  I see no reason for it.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Sat, 7 Sep 2002 12:52:41 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: --with-maxbackends
On Saturday 07 September 2002 12:52 pm, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > Didn't we want to remove that option?
>
> I didn't know it was still in there.  I see no reason for it.

How about --enable-depend, that's not still needed is it?  Or is that 
something other than the new dependancy system?


Sun, 8 Sep 2002 00:25:30 -0400
"Matthew T. O'Connor" <matthew@zeut.net>
Re: --with-maxbackends
Matthew T. O'Connor wrote:
> On Saturday 07 September 2002 12:52 pm, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > > Didn't we want to remove that option?
> >
> > I didn't know it was still in there.  I see no reason for it.
> 
> How about --enable-depend, that's not still needed is it?  Or is that 
> something other than the new dependancy system?

That relates to C file dependencies, not pg_depend.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Sun, 8 Sep 2002 14:59:59 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: --with-maxbackends