On Sat, 2013-11-23 at 11:49 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > My point is, they compile the *backend* as position-independent
> code.
> > The backend is not a shared library. Maybe it is in Postgres-XC?
> But
> > at least this makes their build process significantly different, so
> it's
> > doubtful that
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On Fri, 2013-11-22 at 23:32 +, Greg Stark wrote:
>> Debian policy is to always use -fPIC
> My point is, they compile the *backend* as position-independent code.
> The backend is not a shared library. Maybe it is in Postgres-XC? But
> at least this makes their buil
On Fri, 2013-11-22 at 23:32 +, Greg Stark wrote:
> According to the Debian build logs, postgres-xc compiles the
> entire
> backend with -fPIC. Not sure what sense that makes.
>
>
> Debian policy is to always use -fPIC
My point is, they compile the *backend* as positi
Greg Stark writes:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 8:51 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> According to the Debian build logs, postgres-xc compiles the entire
>> backend with -fPIC. Not sure what sense that makes.
> Debian policy is to always use -fPIC
> IIRC -fpic is good enough as long as the total si
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 8:51 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 11/22/13, 12:41 PM, Michael Meskes wrote:
> > Checking the Debian logs it appears that all calls use *both* which
> seems to do
> > the right thing. And yes, it appears there is a change in XC that makes
> it
> > break. But still, I wo
On 11/22/13, 12:41 PM, Michael Meskes wrote:
> Checking the Debian logs it appears that all calls use *both* which seems to
> do
> the right thing. And yes, it appears there is a change in XC that makes it
> break. But still, I would think there has to be a correct set of options.
According to th
Michael Meskes writes:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 11:27:45AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Furthermore, if we change that convention now, we're going to increase
>> the risk of such mixing failures for other people.
> Sure, but if this a bug we should. I'm not saying it is, I simply don't know.
Well,
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 11:27:45AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think this is probably nonsense. I spent ten years maintaining Postgres
> for Red Hat, and I never saw any such failure on s390 in their packages.
> If -fpic weren't good enough for shared libraries on s390, how'd any of
> those builds
Michael Meskes writes:
> I spend some time trying to figure out why PostgreSQL builds on
> S390-Linux, but Postgres-XC doesn't. Well at least this holds for the Debian
> packages. So far I haven't figured it out. However, it appears to me that the
> build should fail for both. I'm not an S390 exp
Hi,
I spend some time trying to figure out why PostgreSQL builds on
S390-Linux, but Postgres-XC doesn't. Well at least this holds for the Debian
packages. So far I haven't figured it out. However, it appears to me that the
build should fail for both. I'm not an S390 expert by any means, but I was
10 matches
Mail list logo
