On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 01:34:34PM -0800, Steve Atkins wrote: > On Mar 11, 2010, at 1:06 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > > > > BTW, I'm not sure I buy the argument that commercial software > > requires static linking. Red Hat would be as interested in that > > market as anybody, and as I said, they don't think it's necessary > > to ship static libraries (with a *very* short list of exceptions). > > Trying to support a binary distributed[1] application on a dozen or > more different distributions is fairly painful (I'm building on four > Debians, eight Ubuntus, several RHELs, three Solarises and a few > others right now), and the biggest problem is the different > distributions don't package all the libraries you need, and when > they do they include a wide range of versions, often woefully > obsolete.
I've found it easiest to ship all of PostgreSQL rather than deal with this kind of stuff. Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fet...@gmail.com iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
