From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: install libpq.dll in bin directory on Windows / Cygwin |
Date: | 2014-12-22 05:05:41 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqSJpH8mcFqTz8BNtVapFSy6zSS5PitiRgzMWjfmN9tWnQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 6:11 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> On 2/1/14, 3:22 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> In the end I went with the way I had suggested, because that's what the
>> MSVC system does - it doesn't copy any other DLLs to the bin directory.
>> So doing that seemed sane for backpatching, to bring the two build
>> systems into sync.
>>
>> If you want to propose a better arrangement for the future, to include,
>> say, ecpg DLLs, and including changes to the MSVC system, we can discuss
>> that separately.
>
> See attached patch.
>
> There is also the commit fest item
> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=1330 that
> requests the MSVC builds to install the epcg libraries in the bin directory.
Looking finally at this patch. In short, it moves to bin/
libpgtypes.dll, libecpg.dll and libecpg_compat.dll for cygwin and
MinGW build using some additional processing in Makefile.shlib,
removing at the same time the win32 stuff in libpq/Makefile.
IMO, it would be more readable to replace this part with a separate if
block for readability. So changing that:
- '$(DESTDIR)$(libdir)/$(shlib)' \
+ '$(DESTDIR)$(libdir)/$(shlib)' $(if $(findstring
$(PORTNAME),win32 cygwin),'$(DESTDIR)$(bindir)/$(shlib)') \
For that:
ifneq(blah)
blah2
endif
The MSVC portion of this fix got completely lost in the void:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=1330
Peter, could it be possible to merge this patch with its MSVC portion
for simplicity? I think that it would more readable to do all the
changes at the same time once and for all. Also, that's still a bug,
so are we still considering a backpatch? I wouldn't mind putting some
time into a patch to get that fixed..
Regards,
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2014-12-22 05:30:40 | Re: documentation update for doc/src/sgml/func.sgml |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2014-12-22 05:05:35 | Re: Suppressing elog.c context messages (was Re: Wait free LW_SHARED acquisition) |