Hey Tom, Shane,
actually, PHP w/out the PG stuff builds just fine with x86_64 and i386
specified at the same time. I didn't bother with the PPC
architectures, since I don't have a Leopard capable PPC box any more.
My old PowerBook G3/500 point blank refuses to run anything higher
than 10.4.11 :).
When I tried the build, including the PG libs for both architectures,
I got error messages for missing symbols only for the i386
architecture (since I only built the PG libs for 64-bit). Everything
else seemed to be present.
I'm good to run with the x86_64 only binary since my Apache is built
using that architecture. I'm also not to worried about any bugs in the
64-bit OS X code, this is for development only, no live data, ever. If
it crashes or mangles up my data, so be it, backups must be good for
something, right? Would have been nice though, to go and give the
completely built libphp5.so module to somebody and say 'here, run it'
regardless of what his hardware architecture supports.
best regards,
chris
--
chris ruprecht
network grunt and bit pusher extraordinaíre
On Jan 3, 2008, at 00:41, Tom Lane wrote:
> Chris Ruprecht <chris@ruprecht.org> writes:
>> I am trying to build PG 8.3Beta4 for MacOS Leopard.
>> It works fine when using the default i386 architecture. However, this
>> is not an option as Apple, in their wisdom, have chosen to build
>> Apache as a 64-bit application and their PHP 5.2.4 module without PG
>> support as a Intel 32, Intel 64, PPC 32 and PPC 64 type module. For
>> those that don't know: Under MacOS, it is possible to build
>> executables that will run native on multiple architectures, all
>> contained in a single file - kind of weird, and pretty bloated.
>
> You're not going to have a lot of luck building PG for those four
> architectures from a single build run --- you really need a different
> pg_config.h for each case. The specific failure you're seeing seems
> to stem from SIZEOF_DATUM not agreeing with sizeof(Datum), but you
> can bet your bottom dollar that that's just the tip of the iceberg.
>
> I'd be somewhat interested to see a build approach that supports this,
> but I don't want to spend any of my own time on it. I have a vague
> suspicion that Apple probably built PHP four separate times and then
> melded the executables after the fact.
>
> regards, tom lane