Re: [QUESTIONS] Testing Postgresql v6.3
At 15:17 -0000 on 5/3/98, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
You should technically be able to run it on a different port,
*but* you might have problems with the shared libraries, where trying to
run v6.3 is seeing v6.1's shared libraries, and won't work...
May I make a suggestion? In future versions, include the version number in
the names of the libraries.
Herouth
Import Notes
Reply to msg id not found: Pine.NEB.3.95.980305101649.1068A-100000@hub.orgReference msg id not found: 9803051451.AA26015@alpha.comsource.net
At 15:17 -0000 on 5/3/98, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
You should technically be able to run it on a different port,
*but* you might have problems with the shared libraries, where trying to
run v6.3 is seeing v6.1's shared libraries, and won't work...May I make a suggestion? In future versions, include the version number in
the names of the libraries.
Then everyone has to update all their Makefiles after an upgrade.
--
Bruce Momjian | 830 Blythe Avenue
maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
+ If your life is a hard drive, | (610) 353-9879(w)
+ Christ can be your backup. | (610) 853-3000(h)At 17:51 -0000 on 8/3/98, Bruce Momjian wrote:
At 15:17 -0000 on 5/3/98, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
You should technically be able to run it on a different port,
*but* you might have problems with the shared libraries, where trying to
run v6.3 is seeing v6.1's shared libraries, and won't work...May I make a suggestion? In future versions, include the version number in
the names of the libraries.Then everyone has to update all their Makefiles after an upgrade.
More likely, re-link a symbolic link.
If the executables in the postgres distributions rely on the libraries
themselves, they should link directly to the versioned library. There
should be a symbolic link giving the versioned library the generic name.
It's rather important to be able to easily keep two versions of the same
software on the same machine. It allows for testing of the new version,
cleaning it and weeding any problems, while still using the old version for
production stuff. I'm sure not everyone has a spare machine, and if you
have, it doesn't always have the same setup as your main machine (for
example, it may not be accessible from the web).
Herouth
Bruce Momjian wrote:
At 15:17 -0000 on 5/3/98, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
You should technically be able to run it on a different port,
*but* you might have problems with the shared libraries, where trying to
run v6.3 is seeing v6.1's shared libraries, and won't work...May I make a suggestion? In future versions, include the version number in
the names of the libraries.Then everyone has to update all their Makefiles after an upgrade.
No, 'make install' would of course update the symlinks, just
as with any shared library.
/* m */
Bruce,
Could we not just create a symbolic link from libpq.so -> Current version.
Then only those who need to use
a different version from the default would have to make any changes.
Matt
At 15:17 -0000 on 5/3/98, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
You should technically be able to run it on a different port,
*but* you might have problems with the shared libraries, where trying
to > > run v6.3 is seeing v6.1's shared libraries, and won't work...
May I make a suggestion? In future versions, include the version number
in > the names of the libraries.
Then everyone has to update all their Makefiles after an upgrade.
--
Bruce Momjian | 830 Blythe Avenue
maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
+ If your life is a hard drive, | (610) 353-9879(w)
+ Christ can be your backup. | (610) 853-3000(h)Import Notes
Resolved by subject fallback
Bruce,
Could we not just create a symbolic link from libpq.so -> Current version.
Then only those who need to use
a different version from the default would have to make any changes.
*.so is a platform-specific library extension.
--
Bruce Momjian | 830 Blythe Avenue
maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
+ If your life is a hard drive, | (610) 353-9879(w)
+ Christ can be your backup. | (610) 853-3000(h)
On Mon, 9 Mar 1998 Matt@dutepp2.et.tudelft.nl wrote:
Bruce,
Could we not just create a symbolic link from libpq.so -> Current version.
Then only those who need to use
a different version from the default would have to make any changes.Matt
At 15:17 -0000 on 5/3/98, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
You should technically be able to run it on a different port,
*but* you might have problems with the shared libraries, where tryingto > > run v6.3 is seeing v6.1's shared libraries, and won't work...
May I make a suggestion? In future versions, include the version number
in > the names of the libraries.
Then everyone has to update all their Makefiles after an upgrade.
How about setting a so-name? I don't know much about libraries, but AFAIK
you can at least give dyn. libs a so-name, ie. libtermcap.so.2.0.8, where
2.0.8 is the so-name (2 is major, and there are some minor numbers etc.).
libraries with the same major so-number are binary compatible (ie. don't
require a relink of your programs).
There got to be some ppl around here that know more about this stuff then
I do....
Maarten
_____________________________________________________________________________
| TU Delft, The Netherlands, Faculty of Information Technology and Systems |
| Department of Electrical Engineering |
| Computer Architecture and Digital Technique section |
| M.Boekhold@et.tudelft.nl |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------