On 9 December 2011 16:13, Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> wrote: > Is there any good reason why we shouldn't build and install a dynamic > libpgport.so?
+1 in favour of building and installing a dynamic libpgport.so. I generally agree with your analysis. I've seen this issue crop up a good few times now. I'm a Fedora user myself, but about 2 years ago I got into a "he said she said" situation with an OpenSUSE package maintainer over this, when I had to build Slony on that platform. I'm a bit hazy on the details now, but iirc he thought that it wasn't necessary to ship libpgport.a in particular (though I don't think that they have a beef with static libraries generally) - maybe they took a cue from Redhat there? -- Peter Geoghegan http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
