Re: postgresql 18 and shm

[Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>]

Rob Whitlock <rwhitlock22%gmail.com@localhost> writes:

> Would it be possible to point to local documentation instead/as well?
> I do not like this trend towards solely Internet-based documentation.
> It turns Internet access into a requirement.

If pgsql docs are not in pgksrc, you can create a package in wip.  But
there are some. I don't know if it has that manual or not.    But sure,
if somebody can produce the few bytes that belong, that's easy.

as for the larger issue:

If the sources are not available, and that's too hard, then you can file
a bug with postgresql that their docs are too hard to build and package.

I agree with your sentiment, but it's not reasonable to inject it as a
blocker for resolving problems.  It's also not reasonable as a basis for
generating ad hoc copies of bits of doc in pkgsrc land, which people
seem to often want to do.

When you run pgsql, you have to read their docs.  That was true before
this problem and it remains true.   So fixing up the local doc issue --
which I support -- is an orthogonal issue.


Fundamentally, this is not a pkgsrc problem, it's a postgresql on NetBSD
problem, that would arise if you downloaded and built pgsql following
their instructions.  That's a lot of why I'm trying to fix this in
NetBSD or expect pgsql to be better about errors.