Re: pg9 beta1, make check fails

From: Andy Colson <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg9 beta1, make check fails
Date: 2010-05-04 14:50:28
Message-ID: 4BE03434.4020402@squeakycode.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On 5/4/2010 9:37 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andy Colson<andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net> writes:
>> On 5/3/2010 9:44 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I'm not immediately seeing a simple way to improve this.
>
>> How about building a statically linked psql in 'make check', just for
>> pg_regress to use?
>
> [ shrug... ] That sort of defeats the purpose of testing the binaries
> we are intending to install.
>
> Actually I guess the real question here is why psql failed to link to
> the newly-built shared libraries. pg_regress sets up LD_LIBRARY_PATH
> but that seems not to have done the trick for you. What platform are
> you on exactly?
>
> regards, tom lane

Slackware 64:

# uname -a
Linux mapper 2.6.32.7 #1 SMP Fri Jan 29 21:04:54 CST 2010 x86_64 AMD
Athlon(tm) II X2 245 Processor AuthenticAMD GNU/Linux

I do have /usr/local/pgsql/lib in my /etc/ld.so.conf. Not sure how
ldconfig and LD_LIBRARY_PATH interact.

> [ shrug... ] That sort of defeats the purpose of testing the binaries
> we are intending to install.

True, yea, but, I wonder how many times, it has used the previous
versions .so's? In which case you are testing the new server with the
old client. And never really knew. I'v tried out several versions
since I started with 8.0, and I'll bet I do make; make check; more often
than not. How many of those times picked up the prior .so's? I'd bet
quite a few.

-Andy

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Leif Biberg Kristensen 2010-05-04 14:58:39 Re: GeSHi module for Postgresql?
Previous Message Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz 2010-05-04 14:44:45 Re: Avoiding surrogate keys