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@gmx.net       http://yi.org/peter-e/