Re: PG still fussy to compile on Solaris + GCC, may still need Sun ld

Okay, thanks for the help.

Matt

Matt Benjamin President/CTO

The Linux Box
206 South Fifth Ave. Suite 150
Ann Arbor, MI 48104

tel. 734-761-4689
fax. 734-769-8938
pgr. 734-431-0118

On Sat, 2 Sep 2000, Tom Lane wrote:

> Matt Benjamin <matt(at)linuxbox(dot)nu> writes:
> > What do you mean, "do what it wanted?" The configure script produced a
> > setup that would not build a perl interface, and the error was related to
> > SunWS compiler options.
>
> > Sounds like half my problem was using the Perl5 that Sun provides with
> > Solaris 8. . .
>
> Urgh, could be. If you'd built and installed Perl yourself, it'd be a
> pretty good bet that it'd report a compiler name and switches that would
> actually work on your box. If you're using a vendor-supplied Perl then
> I could see how there might be a problem: perhaps they used a compiler
> different from the one you have.
>
> Not sure what we could/should do about this. We used to try to force
> the perl5 interface to be built with the same compiler/switches used for
> Postgres. Our current behavior (ie, just accepting MakeMaker's stored
> recollection of the Perl build setup) was chosen after getting reports
> that that didn't work either, on machines where there was actually some
> material difference. Seems like we lose either way, just on different
> machines...
>
> > The larger problem was of linking the PG libs. I had a copy of Sun ld
> > around, but, since this (somehow, like the compiler) doesn't come with the
> > OS, it is a safe bet that a fair number of folks won't have it.
>
> I'd argue that that means GNU ld is broken on your platform, and you
> ought to be complaining to the bintools people about it. Postgres
> doesn't do anything particularly out-of-the-ordinary as far as the
> linker is concerned.
>
> regards, tom lane
>