"Albe Laurenz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think there's a reasonable argument that by installing a .a file that
>> isn't a shared library, we are violating the platform's conventions.

> The natural way in AIX would be:
> - Create libpq.so
> - Create libpq.a by 'rm -f libpq.a; ar -rc libpq.a libpq.so'
> - Install only libpq.a

Hm.  This seems possible with some moderate hacking on Makefile.shlib
(certainly it'd be no more invasive than the existing Windows-specific
platform variants).  However, looking at what's already in
Makefile.shlib for AIX makes me doubt the above claim a bit, because
AFAICS libpq.so is produced from libpq.a on that platform.  Is it
possible that the rules have changed across AIX versions, and that the
code in there now is needful for older versions?

Another issue with installing only .a is that there's no provision
for versioning in .a library names ... what happens to someone who
needs two generations of libpq on his machine?

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to