Re: Antw: Re: 8.3beta2 fails to compile on Centos5 x86_64
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Antw: Re: 8.3beta2 fails to compile on Centos5 x86_64 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 18625.1194794330@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Antw: Re: 8.3beta2 fails to compile on Centos5 x86_64 ("Marcel Gsteiger" <Marcel.Gsteiger@milprog.ch>) |
Ответы |
Re: [Pgsqlrpms-hackers] Antw: Re: 8.3beta2 fails to
compile on Centos5 x86_64
|
Список | pgsql-ports |
"Marcel Gsteiger" <Marcel.Gsteiger@milprog.ch> writes: >> Hmm. I suspect either we're short a BuildRequire or two, or you missed >> something that's considered part of the standard minimum build >> environment. The "exceptions" list on this page shows what Red Hat >> considers the core set of packages that needn't be BuildRequire'd: >> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions >> However, none of those look particularly likely to result in the >> failure you're seeing here :-(. Could you send along the config.log >> output? > Thanks for your tip. In fact, my "basic packages, customize later"-type install from DVD did not install the followingpackages from the mentioned list: > gcc-c++ > libstdc++-devel > redhat-rpm-config > After I have installed these, everything now works perfectly. Interesting. We don't do any C++ stuff, so I would hope that the first two of those are irrelevant. redhat-rpm-config, however, might well be relevant. I remember Devrim running into an odd build failure on a machine where it wasn't installed. I wonder if it'd be worth explicitly BuildRequire'ing redhat-rpm-config in the PGDG SRPM? I don't feel the need to do it in Fedora/RHEL, because as mentioned there's an explicit policy not to for those projects. But it seems the PGDG RPMs get rebuilt in a rather wider variety of environments. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-ports по дате отправления: