From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Thomas G(dot) Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
Cc: | Postgres Hackers List <hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Re: AWL: PostgreSQL ODBC. |
Date: | 1998-10-27 18:48:56 |
Message-ID: | 6615.909514136@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Thomas G. Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> writes:
> Actually, I don't know why the Makefile.shlib needs anything
> platform-specific other than perhaps helping with the naming conventions
> for libraries. If the LDFLAGS_SL was in the platform template then
> Makefile.shlib wouldn't need anything in that regard, right?
You're right, much of that stuff could be shoved out into the
Makefile.port files. Maybe all of it --- does anyone know GNU Make's
substitution rules well enough to know whether
shlib := lib$(NAME)$(DLSUFFIX).$(SO_MAJOR_VERSION).$(SO_MINOR_VERSION)
can appear *before* NAME and so forth get defined? If so, the
library naming rule could be defined by Makefile.port too. I was
being conservative when I wrote Makefile.shlib, but I'm not sure
that the order of declarations it recommends is really essential.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas G. Lockhart | 1998-10-27 19:06:30 | Re: Configure problem, redux (was Re: TCL installation troubles) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 1998-10-27 18:43:52 | Re: [HACKERS] make install fails in perl5 ... |