Re: Fedora package status for 1.6.3 and above

Dave Page wrote:
>
>> ------- Original Message -------
>> From: "Florian G. Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>
>> To: Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org>
>> Sent: 27/03/07, 21:31:59
>> Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Fedora package status for 1.6.3 and above
>>
>> Maybe we could build a generic statically linked binary (for i386 at least)
>> , for those distributions which nobody does up-to-date builds for?
>>
>> If there is interest in this, I could try to build such a package for
>> 1.6.3 in the next few days. Dunno how hard it is to build a version
>> that runs on the majority of the distributions out there though..
>
> I'm keen to see this work for other reasons. Would be pleased to see you work
> on it (and can help if need be).

What would a sensible version of libc be to require? I've installed
debian woody into a chroot, but noticed that the newest gcc it includes
is 3.0 - which is pretty acient, and might cause trouble with wx
or pgadmin.

OTOH, debian sarge contains libc 2.3, not 2.2 like woody. I'm not sure
how many peopel still run distros without libc 2.3...

Any ideas? Do you guys think that compiling wx+pgadmin3 with gcc 3.0 will work?

greetings, Florian Pflug