Re: libpq.so.2.0 problem

Lamar Owen writes:

> I think that by packaging the RPM's to include libpq.so.2.x as simply
> libpq.so.2 (as long as 2.x's are link-compatible), I can help alleviate
> this problem for future builds.
>
> The consensus within the PostgreSQL developer community is that 'we
> version our libs. If an OS has a problem with that, and others do not,
> then that isn't our problem.' Source-centric, I know. But it's just
> the way it is.

Um, what do you suggest that we do? This is how you create shared
libraries on GNU/Linux. Even Red Hat seems to think so:

peter ~$ ls -l /usr/lib/libjpeg*
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 166028 Jul 13 20:51 /usr/lib/libjpeg.a
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 470 Jul 13 20:51 /usr/lib/libjpeg.la*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 17 Oct 1 03:27 /usr/lib/libjpeg.so -> libjpeg.so.62.0.0*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 17 Oct 1 03:27 /usr/lib/libjpeg.so.62 -> libjpeg.so.62.0.0*
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 141528 Jul 13 20:51 /usr/lib/libjpeg.so.62.0.0*

...and even Libtool:

peter ~/gnu/lib$ ls -l
total 112
-rw-r--r-- 1 peter peter 54368 Nov 1 21:56 libltdl.a
-rwxr-xr-x 1 peter peter 704 Nov 1 21:56 libltdl.la*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 peter peter 16 Nov 1 21:56 libltdl.so -> libltdl.so.0.2.0*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 peter peter 16 Nov 1 21:56 libltdl.so.0 -> libltdl.so.0.2.0*
-rwxr-xr-x 1 peter peter 56176 Nov 1 21:56 libltdl.so.0.2.0*

There *might* be a problem with the -soname thing, but I recall that that
patch came from someone with SuSE, so they probably knew what they were
doing. The symlink order will not be changed, other improvements are
welcome.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net http://yi.org/peter-e/