Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Why are these modules built without respecting my LDFLAGS?

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Aaron W(dot) Swenson" <aaron(dot)w(dot)swenson(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Why are these modules built without respecting my LDFLAGS?
Date: 2010-06-28 05:03:23
Message-ID: 1277701404.28109.0.camel@vanquo.pezone.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On sön, 2010-06-27 at 19:41 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> OK, so after some digging I find that, while most of the .so's in our
> build are made using Makefile.shlib, pgxs's "MODULES" build rules
> don't
> use that.  Instead they rely on the "%.so: %.o" (and platform-specific
> variants of that) rules found in src/makefiles/Makefile*.  And on most
> platforms we've neglected to include LDFLAGS_SL in those rules.  This
> seems like an oversight, especially since the one platform that has
> nonempty LDFLAGS_SL by default (AIX) does include LDFLAGS_SL.
> 
> This seems like a clear bug.  I'm hesitant to back-patch a change like
> that, but not hesitant to fix it in HEAD.

I think this issue is brought up about once a year.  You might want to
review previous discussions.


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2010-06-28 07:17:48
Subject: Re: Keepalive for max_standby_delay
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-06-28 02:24:21
Subject: Re: pg_dump's checkSeek() seems inadequate

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group