Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Well, I vote we take it out, which would eliminate these warnings >> instead of just shorten them. On a platform where tsorting a >> non-shared library's contents is actually essential, libpq.a would be >> useless anyway
> I don't think that the primary purpose of tsort/lorder is to produce a > functioning library. The idea is to reduce the link time when the > library is later used by reducing the number of passes that the link > editor has to make over the input libraries. That is a revisionist view of history. The GNU coreutils people, for instance, remember it the same way I do: http://www.delorie.com/gnu/docs/textutils/coreutils_32.html (In practice, I'm not sure anyone still uses libpq.a at all, rather than libpq.so ...) regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
