| From: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: libpqxx |
| Date: | 2002-08-12 19:44:12 |
| Message-ID: | 20020812164236.C24309-100000@mail1.hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, 11 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > The problem I see now is that libpqxx has a completely different build
> > system and documentation system.
>
> Unless someone's going to do the work to integrate libpqxx into our
> build/documentation system, I have to agree with Peter: it should not
> be part of our core distribution.
For this, all I've been waiting for is for J to get the standalone to
build and then going to dive into that ...
> Since Marc's been moaning about bloat, I'm sure he'll vote for pulling
> both libpq++ and libpqxx from the core distro and making them separate
> packages. This would be okay with me.
Okay, but if we are going to pull libpqxx, what about the other lib's too?
> However: making libpq++ buildable standalone would take some work too.
> Any way you slice it, we need some work here... any volunteers?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeroen T. Vermeulen | 2002-08-12 19:59:37 | Re: libpqxx |
| Previous Message | ngpg | 2002-08-12 18:46:58 | Re: [SECURITY] DoS attack on backend possible (was: Re: |