Improvement of installation document

Hi,

I apologize that I　accidentally sent the following email to this list.
Please disregard this.

I am sorry for making a lot of noise.

Regard,

On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 20:38:31 +0900
Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp> wrote:

Hi,

One of our clients suggested that the installation document[1] lacks description
about requriements of installing *-devel packages. For example, postgresqlxx-devel
is required for using --with-pgsql, and openssl-devel for --with-openssl, and so on,
but these are not documented.

[1] http://www.pgpool.net/docs/pgpool-II-3.7.4/en/html/install-pgpool.html

I know the document of PostgreSQL[2] also lacks the description about openssl-devel,
kerberos-devel, etc. (except to readline-devl). However, it would be convenient
for users who want to install Pgpool-II from source code if the required packages
for installation are described in the document explicitly.

[2] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/install-requirements.html

Is it not worth to consider this?

BTW, the Pgpool-II doc[2] says:

--with-memcached=path
Pgpool-II binaries will use memcached for in memory query cache. You have to install libmemcached.

, but maybe libmemcached-devel is correct instead of libmemcached?

Regards,

--
Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>

--
Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>

--
Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>

One of our clients suggested that the installation document[1] lacks description
about requriements of installing *-devel packages. For example, postgresqlxx-devel
is required for using --with-pgsql, and openssl-devel for --with-openssl, and so on,
but these are not documented.

[1] http://www.pgpool.net/docs/pgpool-II-3.7.4/en/html/install-pgpool.html

I know the document of PostgreSQL[2] also lacks the description about openssl-devel,
kerberos-devel, etc. (except to readline-devl). However, it would be convenient
for users who want to install Pgpool-II from source code if the required packages
for installation are described in the document explicitly.

[2] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/install-requirements.html

Is it not worth to consider this?

I am against the idea.

Development package names could differ according to
distributions/OS. For example, the developement package of OpenSSL is
"openssl-dev", not "openssl-devel" in Debian or Debian derived
systems.

Another reason is, a user who is installaing software from source code
should be familiar enough with the fact that each software requires
development libraries.

In summary adding not-so-complete-list-of-development-package-names to
our document will give incorrect information to novice users, and will
be annoying for skilled users.

BTW, the Pgpool-II doc[2] says:

--with-memcached=path
Pgpool-II binaries will use memcached for in memory query cache. You have to install libmemcached.

, but maybe libmemcached-devel is correct instead of libmemcached?

I don't think so. "libmemcached-devel" is just a package name in a
cetain Linux distribution. "libmemcached" is a more geneal and non
distribution dependent term.

Best regards,
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp

On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 22:18:53 +0900 (JST)
Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@sraoss.co.jp> wrote:

One of our clients suggested that the installation document[1] lacks description
about requriements of installing *-devel packages. For example, postgresqlxx-devel
is required for using --with-pgsql, and openssl-devel for --with-openssl, and so on,
but these are not documented.

[1] http://www.pgpool.net/docs/pgpool-II-3.7.4/en/html/install-pgpool.html

I know the document of PostgreSQL[2] also lacks the description about openssl-devel,
kerberos-devel, etc. (except to readline-devl). However, it would be convenient
for users who want to install Pgpool-II from source code if the required packages
for installation are described in the document explicitly.

[2] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/install-requirements.html

Is it not worth to consider this?

I am against the idea.

Development package names could differ according to
distributions/OS. For example, the developement package of OpenSSL is
"openssl-dev", not "openssl-devel" in Debian or Debian derived
systems.

Another reason is, a user who is installaing software from source code
should be familiar enough with the fact that each software requires
development libraries.

In summary adding not-so-complete-list-of-development-package-names to
our document will give incorrect information to novice users, and will
be annoying for skilled users.

OK. I agreed.

# From this viewpoint, it would not be so good that PostgreSQL doc[2]
# mentions readline-devel...., but this is noa a topic here.

BTW, the Pgpool-II doc[2] says:

--with-memcached=path
Pgpool-II binaries will use memcached for in memory query cache. You have to install libmemcached.

, but maybe libmemcached-devel is correct instead of libmemcached?

I don't think so. "libmemcached-devel" is just a package name in a
cetain Linux distribution. "libmemcached" is a more geneal and non
distribution dependent term.

Thanks for your explaination. I understood it.

Best regards,
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp

--
Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>