Sender: tgl@mythos.jpl.nasa.gov
Message-ID: <35A4D2DA.2D066E6C@alumni.caltech.edu>
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 14:25:30 +0000
From: "Thomas G. Lockhart" <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>
Organization: Caltech/JPL
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: David Hartwig <daveh@insightdist.com>
CC: Postgres Hackers List <hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Re: [HACKERS] Access & Postgres
References: <35A133DB.CFE63868@insightdist.com> <17439.980708@bo.nettuno.it>
	<35A397BC.227963C7@insightdist.com>
	<35A44BC2.2BD59A30@alumni.caltech.edu>
	<35A4C8CE.3A7A43BC@insightdist.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> I am curious though.   Did you apply the patch, mentioned below, to 
> your latest 6.4 tree?    This patch should have been already part of 
> the latest 6.4.   And, to my knowledge, it was already applied 
> completely and successfully.

I did my final tests using a fresh cvs tree two days ago just before
committing my big "patch wad". In the last two or three weeks I did have
a "merge problem" with my patches in the resjunk area, which might have
been the patches you are talking about.

> Now that I think of it, though, this version of the patch does not 
> include the new "output" and "sql"  files necessary for the regression 
> test.   In any case, I should clean that up.

I am in the process of renaming and moving the "resjunk" test to
"select_implicit". Will try to commit the changes this morning so it is
available to you.

At the moment, all regression tests (except "random") pass on my Linux
box :)

                        - Tom