Re: [HACKERS] Building Postgres

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
Cc: Postgres Hackers List <hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Building Postgres
Date: 1999-06-21 21:35:02
Message-ID: 17757.930000902@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> writes:
> I am wrong about this one (the shared library *is* built during "make
> all"), but am still looking for suggestions for the right way to phase
> the building for an installation. Do other platforms have statically
> built apps too?

The only really good, cross-platform solution that I know about is to
start using GNU "libtool" to manage the construction of the shared
libraries and the applications that depend on them. There are enough
different ways to handle (or mishandle) shared libs on different Unix
platforms that I do not think it a good use of our time to try to solve
the problem piecemeal; we'd just be reinventing libtool, probably not
very well.

I have it on my to-do list to incorporate libtool into the Postgres
build system, but I have been putting off actually doing anything,
because I don't think that the current release of libtool is quite there
on supporting multiple levels of library dependencies (pgtclsh depends
on libpgtcl.so depends on libpq.so...). This feature was originally
promised for libtool 1.3 but has been put off to 1.4.

In the meantime, I'd suggest living with the static-library build, or
else installing libpq and then repeating the build step for psql...

regards, tom lane

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 1999-06-21 21:40:32 Re: [HACKERS] has anybody else used r-tree indexes in 6.5?
Previous Message Clark Evans 1999-06-21 20:14:38 Re: [HACKERS] BSD vs. GPL