Re: Question on inconsistency between PGDG deb "server-dev" and rpm “devel" packages regarding “libpgfeutils.a"

On Fri, Nov 7, 2025 at 6:26 PM Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org> wrote:

> Re: Manika Singhal
> > On Debian-based systems, the postgresql-server-dev package includes the
> > static library *libpgfeutils.a*,
>
> Some packages need it, but it's rare and possibly there's ways to
> avoid it. Now if I remembered which package that was...
>
> commit fdfa5c42c8e20178e884a91a2366eb9a723dab02
> Author: Christoph Berg <christoph(dot)berg(at)credativ(dot)de>
> Date: Tue May 8 15:32:07 2018 +0200
>
> Move libpgport.a, libpgcommon.a, and libpgfeutils.a from libdir to
> pkglibdir
>
> These static libraries are server-version dependant (though many
> functions are compatible), so move them from $libdir to $pkglibdir,
> i.e.
> from /usr/lib/<triplet> to /usr/lib/postgresql/NN/lib.
>
> commit 497ecce60b7c149c7839b371cc1b7d6f390e32ab
> Author: Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>
> Date: Sat Mar 26 16:47:11 2016 +0100
>
> Install usr/lib/*/libpgfeutils.a
>
> Christoph
>

Hi Christoph,
Thank you for your response! And sorry for the late reply.

I understand now that this file* libpgfeutils.a* is included in debian
packages.
But I still wonder why it is still excluded from the RPM packages.

And would that be okay if downstream packagers just go ahead and
include it in RPM packages also?
Or are we required to align with this and keep it as upstream only?

--

<https://www.percona.com/>

Manika Singhal
Build and Release Engineer, Percona

manika(dot)singhal(at)percona(dot)com

Databases Run Better With Percona