8.2beta1 does not compile for me on Solaris 10

From: Joseph Shraibman <jks(at)selectacast(dot)net>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: 8.2beta1 does not compile for me on Solaris 10
Date: 2006-10-10 19:26:41
Message-ID: 452BF3F1.6080805@selectacast.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

[jks(at)xx ~/postgresql-8.2beta1]$ ./configure --enable-debug --with-cassert
checking build system type... i386-pc-solaris2.10
checking host system type... i386-pc-solaris2.10
checking which template to use... solaris
checking whether to build with 64-bit integer date/time support... no
checking whether NLS is wanted... no
checking for default port number... 5432
checking for gcc... gcc
checking for C compiler default output file name... a.out
checking whether the C compiler works... yes
checking whether we are cross compiling... no
checking for suffix of executables...
checking for suffix of object files... o
checking whether we are using the GNU C compiler... yes
checking whether gcc accepts -g... yes
checking for gcc option to accept ANSI C... none needed
checking if gcc supports -Wdeclaration-after-statement... yes
checking if gcc supports -Wendif-labels... yes
checking if gcc supports -fno-strict-aliasing... yes
configure: using CFLAGS=-O2 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith
-Winline -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wendif-labels
-fno-strict-aliasing -g
checking whether the C compiler still works... yes
checking how to run the C preprocessor... gcc -E
checking allow thread-safe client libraries... no
checking whether to build with Tcl... no
checking whether to build Perl modules... no
checking whether to build Python modules... no
checking whether to build with Kerberos 5 support... no
checking whether to build with PAM support... no
checking whether to build with LDAP support... no
checking whether to build with Bonjour support... no
checking whether to build with OpenSSL support... no
checking for egrep... egrep
configure: using CPPFLAGS=
configure: using LDFLAGS=
checking for gawk... no
checking for mawk... no
checking for nawk... nawk
checking for flex... /usr/sfw/bin/flex
checking whether ln -s works... yes
checking for ld used by GCC... /usr/ccs/bin/ld
checking if the linker (/usr/ccs/bin/ld) is GNU ld... no
checking for ranlib... ranlib
checking for tar... /usr/bin/tar
checking for strip... strip
checking whether it is possible to strip libraries... no
checking for bison... bison -y
checking for perl... /usr/bin/perl
checking for library containing setproctitle... no
checking for library containing pow... -lm
checking for library containing dlopen... none required
checking for library containing socket... -lsocket
checking for library containing shl_load... no
checking for library containing getopt_long... none required
checking for library containing crypt... none required
checking for library containing fdatasync... -lrt
checking for library containing shmget... none required
checking for -lreadline... no
checking for -ledit... no
configure: error: readline library not found
If you have readline already installed, see config.log for details on the
failure. It is possible the compiler isn't looking in the proper directory.
Use --without-readline to disable readline support.
[jks(at)xx ~/postgresql-8.2beta1]$ uname -a
SunOS xx 5.10 Generic i86pc i386 i86pc

config.log ends with:

## ----------- ##
## confdefs.h. ##
## ----------- ##

#define DEF_PGPORT 5432
#define DEF_PGPORT_STR "5432"
#define PACKAGE_BUGREPORT "pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org"
#define PACKAGE_NAME "PostgreSQL"
#define PACKAGE_STRING "PostgreSQL 8.2beta1"
#define PACKAGE_TARNAME "postgresql"
#define PACKAGE_VERSION "8.2beta1"
#define PG_KRB_SRVNAM "postgres"
#define PG_VERSION "8.2beta1"
#define PG_VERSION_NUM 80200
#define PG_VERSION_STR "PostgreSQL 8.2beta1 on i386-pc-solaris2.10,
compiled by GCC gcc (GCC) 3.4.3 (csl-sol210-3_4-branch+sol_rpath)"

configure: exit 1

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-10-10 19:37:11 Blindly back-patching FAQs is not such a hot idea
Previous Message Jim C. Nasby 2006-10-10 19:18:02 Re: Index Tuning Features