Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Client-side password encryption

On 12/21/05, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Andreas Pflug wrote:
> > Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > So it's only an issue if you have a policy of removing old versions of
> > > libpq on upgrades... I'm not sure what's "best practice" on windows in
> > > this area.
> >
> > When removing the application (in this case: pgsql), you'd remove that
> > old lib as well if it's the only app using it. If you have another
> > application installed, the deinstaller should observe this, and keep the
> > version.
> >
> >
> > I'm voting +1 for lib name versions.
>
> If you add a version number to the Win32 libpq name, you have to update
> any command-line compile tools that mention libpq after an upgrade. The
> Unix linker knows about version numbers, but the Win32 linker doesn't,
> so adding version numbers does add quite a bit of chaos to the Win32
> compile world.
>

win32 compile world *is* a chaos... it's very frustating when you try
to run a program and it fails because a library (when you actually has
the library, at least _a_ version of the library)...

IMHO, adding version numbers to the name of library for windows is a
the cleanest thing you can do...

> --
> Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
> pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
> + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
> + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
>

--
regards,
Jaime Casanova
(DBA: DataBase Aniquilator ;)