Re: [HACKERS] Building on S390

2013-11-24 Thread Peter Eisentraut
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 this is a

Re: [HACKERS] Building on S390

2013-11-23 Thread Peter Eisentraut
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

Re: [HACKERS] Building on S390

2013-11-23 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net 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

[HACKERS] Building on S390

2013-11-22 Thread Michael Meskes
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

Re: [HACKERS] Building on S390

2013-11-22 Thread Tom Lane
Michael Meskes mes...@postgresql.org 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.

Re: [HACKERS] Building on S390

2013-11-22 Thread Michael Meskes
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 get

Re: [HACKERS] Building on S390

2013-11-22 Thread Tom Lane
Michael Meskes mes...@postgresql.org 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

Re: [HACKERS] Building on S390

2013-11-22 Thread Peter Eisentraut
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 the

Re: [HACKERS] Building on S390

2013-11-22 Thread Greg Stark
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 8:51 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net 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

Re: [HACKERS] Building on S390

2013-11-22 Thread Tom Lane
Greg Stark st...@mit.edu writes: On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 8:51 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net 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