Thread

1. Re: [HACKERS] Re: [QUESTIONS] Testing Postgresql v6.3

   (unknown) — 1998-03-09T16:15:05Z

   Bruce, 
   
   Could we not just create a symbolic link from libpq.so -> Current version. 
   Then only those who need to use
   a different version from the default would have to make any changes.
   
   Matt
   
   
   >
   > At 15:17 -0000 on 5/3/98, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
   >
   >
   > >     You should technically be able to run it on a different port,
   > > *but* you might have problems with the shared libraries, where trying 
   to > > run v6.3 is seeing v6.1's shared libraries, and won't work...
   >
   > May I make a suggestion? In future versions, include the version number 
   in > the names of the libraries.
   
   Then everyone has to update all their Makefiles after an upgrade.
   
   --
   Bruce Momjian                          |  830 Blythe Avenue
   maillist@candle.pha.pa.us              |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
   +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  (610) 353-9879(w)
   +  Christ can be your backup.        |  (610) 853-3000(h)
   
   
   
   
   
   

2. Re: [HACKERS] Re: [QUESTIONS] Testing Postgresql v6.3

   Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> — 1998-03-09T16:39:57Z

   > 
   > Bruce, 
   > 
   > Could we not just create a symbolic link from libpq.so -> Current version. 
   > Then only those who need to use
   > a different version from the default would have to make any changes.
   
   *.so is a platform-specific library extension.
   
   -- 
   Bruce Momjian                          |  830 Blythe Avenue
   maillist@candle.pha.pa.us              |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
     +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  (610) 353-9879(w)
     +  Christ can be your backup.        |  (610) 853-3000(h)
   
   

3. Re: [HACKERS] Re: [QUESTIONS] Testing Postgresql v6.3

   Maarten Boekhold <maartenb@dutepp2.et.tudelft.nl> — 1998-03-09T20:27:05Z

   On Mon, 9 Mar 1998 Matt@dutepp2.et.tudelft.nl wrote:
   
   > Bruce, 
   > 
   > Could we not just create a symbolic link from libpq.so -> Current version. 
   > Then only those who need to use
   > a different version from the default would have to make any changes.
   > 
   > Matt
   > 
   > 
   > >
   > > At 15:17 -0000 on 5/3/98, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
   > >
   > >
   > > >     You should technically be able to run it on a different port,
   > > > *but* you might have problems with the shared libraries, where trying 
   > to > > run v6.3 is seeing v6.1's shared libraries, and won't work...
   > >
   > > May I make a suggestion? In future versions, include the version number 
   > in > the names of the libraries.
   > 
   > Then everyone has to update all their Makefiles after an upgrade.
   
   How about setting a so-name? I don't know much about libraries, but AFAIK 
   you can at least give dyn. libs a so-name, ie. libtermcap.so.2.0.8, where 
   2.0.8 is the so-name (2 is major, and there are some minor numbers etc.). 
   libraries with the same major so-number are binary compatible (ie. don't 
   require a relink of your programs).
   
   There got to be some ppl around here that know more about this stuff then 
   I do....
   
   Maarten
   
   _____________________________________________________________________________
   | TU Delft, The Netherlands, Faculty of Information Technology and Systems  |
   |                   Department of Electrical Engineering                    |
   |           Computer Architecture and Digital Technique section             |
   |                          M.Boekhold@et.tudelft.nl                         |
   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------