> Finally, please reconsider what you say about libpq++. If it doesn't
> compile and there's nobody to do serious maintenance on it, why keep
> it bundled? Should an outdated interface be allowed to keep back the
> release cycle for the whole database?
Well, it always compiled when it was compiled together with PostgreSQL
as a whole.
First, it is assumed that the "root" path is /usr/local/pgsql. The
first time I tried to install it was with a RedHat box that had the
postgresql that came with RedHat (installed on /usr directly). So,
I had to play with it to make it work. (when libpq++ was part of
postgresql, then a default RH box would come with both, and both
installed on the right/consistent path)
Also, the lack of a configure seems to be causing another problem;
a DLLIMPORT symbol that is not being defined automatically. So, I
now have to add the switch -DDLLIMPORT="" to the command line to
compile any program using libpq++.
None of these happened when libpq++ was part of postgresql. It's
not that libpq++'s code is outdated or somewhat incompatible with
libpq or with postgresql itself -- it seems to be just lack of
compatibility due to lack of configuration/installation tools
(nothing that can't be remedy, sure, but it became a twisted
procedure, that requires extra time and effort for no good reason).
For the record, none of these seems to happen with Gentoo Linux.
A colleague of mine has told me about it (trying to convince me
to switch from RedHat), and it seems that these guys (Gentoo Linux)
have a magic management/configuration tool called e-merge that
apparently reads one's mind, and it also reads all the developers'
minds in the world, because my colleague tells me that he simply
typed, at a shell prompt:
# e-merge libpq++
And the system figured out that it also needed postgresql, so
it downloaded the source for both, and compiled both -- on the
right path, and everything compiles without a single switch
Anyway, coming back to the libpq++ issue... I understand the basic
rationale behind the decision. But I still think C++ users are
being treated very unfairly. (were the other languages' API's
removed as well? I'm not 100% sure, but I think they weren't...)
pgsql-interfaces by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2003-12-22 05:04:05|
|Subject: Re: C++ with PG 7.4? |
|Previous:||From: Jeroen T. Vermeulen||Date: 2003-12-22 00:48:44|
|Subject: Re: C++ with PG 7.4?|