Re: Compile on x86_64
От | Raymond Auge |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Compile on x86_64 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1144082111.5881.24.camel@E-Learning-Eng.laurentian.ca обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Compile on x86_64 (Raymond Auge <rayauge@doublebite.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Compile on x86_64
|
Список | pgadmin-support |
Note this probably won't be an issue on FC5 because the Extras repository contains wx 2.6.2. Ray On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 12:12 -0400, Raymond Auge wrote: > On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 18:20 +0300, Devrim GUNDUZ wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 10:39 -0400, Raymond Auge wrote: > > > I was under the assumption that an FC4 rpm should build using the > > > standard FC4 wx packages. Is this wrong? I have every wx package > > > installed. > > > > That is wrong. We use Wx from source installation. > > Hmm, then there is really no point in building an FC4 rpm at all... One > should just build from source. This really goes against the theory of > rpm packaging... > > Not a problem. I'll do that. Pity! > > As for whether I WANT an x86_64 build or not is irrelevant. If all the > distribution's libraries are compiled x86_64 then that is the arch I > must target, otherwise why use it at all... > > I know the pain I must go through to run ix86 applications concurrently > with x86_64, and I don't much enjoy it. I'd rather stick with either one > or the other. > > It's simply a matter of principle, and would be no different if I were > using ppc instead (which I do and must compile pgAdminIII there as > well). If there is a src rpm to simplify the move from one platform to > another, then hooray. Otherwise there is always source. > > I'm not complaining, I'm just clarifying my situation and my natural > assumptions. > > Ray > > > > > Regards, -- Raymond Augé Senior System Analyst/Data Architect
В списке pgadmin-support по дате отправления: