GDA: empty PostgreSQL table failed workaround

[Derek Atkins]

Phil Longstaff <plongstaff at rogers.com> writes:

> Derek, any thoughts on the 3.x vs 1.3.x question (from another thread)?  
> If we try to target the gda backend for GC 2.4 (I saw a suggested 
> release date near the end of the 2008), what is the "supported" set of 
> linux releases (fedora 6 and above, suse 10.3 and above, mandriva 2007 
> and above, ...).  My guess is that many of them will still have 1.3.x, 
> though 3.x will be available (or would the GC project need to supply 
> built libgda binaries in a case where we depend on a version newer than 
> is supplied in the distro?).

We usually decide this sometime closer to the release.  Right now I'd
say Fedora 7 (or maybe even Fedora 8, although I'm still on 7 myself)
as the base.  I would say only 3.x, not 1.x.  It's been out long enough.

> Phil

-derek

-- 
       Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
       Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board  (SIPB)
       URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/    PP-ASEL-IA     N1NWH
       warlord at MIT.EDU                        PGP key available