Message d'origine
Copie à: Florian G. Pflug [EMAIL PROTECTED],
De: Adam H.Pendleton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sujet: Re: [SUMMARY] Re: [pgadmin-hackers] New acinclude.m4
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 17:44:44 -0400
A: Raphaël Enrici [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On May 19, 2005, at 5:27 PM, Raphaël Enrici wrote
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Adam H. Pendleton
Sent: 18 May 2005 22:26
To: pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: [pgadmin-hackers] New acinclude.m4
Attached is a new acinclude.m4, and a patch to our current
acinclude
On May 19, 2005, at 4:34 AM, Dave Page wrote:It's already mode 755 on a fresh checkout here.Hmmm, it seems that everything gets a mode of 644 when I use the "download tarball" option from the cvsweb interface (still waiting for a Fink binary for Tiger!).ahp
Dave Page wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Adam H. Pendleton
Sent: 18 May 2005 22:26
To: pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: [pgadmin-hackers] New acinclude.m4
Attached is a new acinclude.m4, and a patch to our current
Yes. Nice catch.
On May 19, 2005, at 1:07 PM, Raphaël Enrici wrote:
Dave Page wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Adam H. Pendleton
Sent: 18 May 2005 22:26
To: pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: [pgadmin-hackers] New
Message d'origine
Copie à: Dave Page dpage@vale-housing.co.uk,
De: Adam H.Pendleton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sujet: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] New acinclude.m4
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 13:14:47 -0400
A: Raphaël Enrici [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yes. Nice catch.
A small one compared to the work you did
Raphaël Enrici wrote:
I have warning concerning ENABLE_STATIC in configure script. Shouldn't
we also remove it crom configure.ac ? (patch attached).
Does this mean the linking statically is not possible anymore?
Or has the check just moved to another place?
greetings, Florian Pflug
Florian G. Pflug wrote:
Raphaël Enrici wrote:
I have warning concerning ENABLE_STATIC in configure script. Shouldn't
we also remove it crom configure.ac ? (patch attached).
Does this mean the linking statically is not possible anymore?
Or has the check just moved to another place?
To me,
Raphaël Enrici wrote:
Florian G. Pflug wrote:
Raphaël Enrici wrote:
I have warning concerning ENABLE_STATIC in configure script. Shouldn't
we also remove it crom configure.ac ? (patch attached).
Does this mean the linking statically is not possible anymore?
Or has the check just moved to another
Florian G. Pflug wrote:
Raphaël Enrici wrote:
Florian G. Pflug wrote:
Raphaël Enrici wrote:
I have warning concerning ENABLE_STATIC in configure script. Shouldn't
we also remove it crom configure.ac ? (patch attached).
Does this mean the linking statically is not possible anymore?
Or has
On May 19, 2005, at 3:24 PM, Florian G. Pflug wrote:
Raphaël Enrici wrote:
Florian G. Pflug wrote:
Raphaël Enrici wrote:
I have warning concerning ENABLE_STATIC in configure script.
Shouldn't
we also remove it crom configure.ac ? (patch attached).
Does this mean the linking statically is not
On May 19, 2005, at 3:46 PM, Raphaël Enrici wrote:
Can you try the patch attached on OSX with a fresh checkout (don't
apply the configure.ac I just sent) ? (I need to rebuild wxWid to
generate static libs... it may take a moment).
Your attached patch isn't going to do anything. `wx-config
On May 19, 2005, at 2:13 PM, Florian G. Pflug wrote:
Raphaël Enrici wrote:
I have warning concerning ENABLE_STATIC in configure script.
Shouldn't
we also remove it crom configure.ac ? (patch attached).
Does this mean the linking statically is not possible anymore?
Or has the check just moved to
Adam H. Pendleton wrote:
On May 19, 2005, at 3:24 PM, Florian G. Pflug wrote:
Raphaël Enrici wrote:
Florian G. Pflug wrote:
Raphaël Enrici wrote:
I have warning concerning ENABLE_STATIC in configure script.
Shouldn't
we also remove it crom configure.ac ? (patch attached).
Does this mean the
Adam H. Pendleton wrote:
On May 19, 2005, at 3:46 PM, Raphaël Enrici wrote:
Can you try the patch attached on OSX with a fresh checkout (don't
apply the configure.ac I just sent) ? (I need to rebuild wxWid to
generate static libs... it may take a moment).
Your attached patch isn't
On May 19, 2005, at 4:30 PM, Raphaël Enrici wrote:
Adam H. Pendleton wrote:
I'm glad to be so rare... It seems I belong to the 1%: I have a
dynamic build. ;)
Please also note that the patch attached reintroduce your code
concerning the static link of the rest of the libs (libpq and sons).
However,
Adam H. Pendleton wrote:
On May 19, 2005, at 4:30 PM, Raphaël Enrici wrote:
Adam H. Pendleton wrote:
I'm glad to be so rare... It seems I belong to the 1%: I have a
dynamic build. ;)
Please also note that the patch attached reintroduce your code
concerning the static link of the rest of the
On May 19, 2005, at 4:54 PM, Raphaël Enrici wrote:
What I'm trying to say is this:
I've a dynamic only build. So, wx-config --libs is ok. wx-config
--static --libs gives an error.
According to what I understand from the wx-config --help output is:
if I had both built and would like to get
Raphaël Enrici wrote:
Adam H. Pendleton wrote:
On May 19, 2005, at 4:30 PM, Raphaël Enrici wrote:
Adam H. Pendleton wrote:
I'm glad to be so rare... It seems I belong to the 1%: I have a
dynamic build. ;)
Please also note that the patch attached reintroduce your code
concerning the static link of
To summarize :
- we reject the configure.ac.patch which removed ENABLE_STATIC and
should not have been included in trunk yet
- we keep the latest acinclude_static.patch which re-add support for
pg_static_build=yes + takes care of systems where wxWid installations
are both static dynamic.
On May 19, 2005, at 5:27 PM, Raphaël Enrici wrote:To summarize :- we reject the configure.ac.patch which removed ENABLE_STATIC andshould not have been included in trunk yetYou mean reject my entire patch? It did much more than just remove ENABLE_STATIC, so it should not be rejected.- we keep the
Attached is a new acinclude.m4, and a patch to our current acinclude,
that relies on wx-config for all the flags. Gone is all the
complicated stuff. The only thing this new acinclude doesn't do is
warn about a missing stc or ogl. It will link against them, but if a
user doesn't have
22 matches
Mail list logo
