Op 5 Feb 2003 (0:54), schreef Matthew Horoschun <mhoroschun@canprint.com.au>:
> Hi Jules,
>
> On Wednesday, February 5, 2003, at 12:06 AM, Peter De Muer (Work)
> wrote:
>
> > try making a soft link libpq.so.2 to the libpq.so.3 file that comes
> > with
> > PHP 7.3.1.
> >>
> >> This is a known issue, but the only solution I could google was
> >> compiling a recent PHP from source or creating a softlink from
> >> libpq.so.3 to libpq.so.2. I read that the link is a bad solution, but
> >> I
> >> really don't like compiling and installing PHP from source.
>
> I think he wanted to avoid the soft link (or hard link for that
> matter)... Its not a neat solution. Generally the whole reason for
> changing library major numbers it to let the users know that the
> exports have changed and that you'll need to recompile your client!
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/news.php?NewsID=105
>
> >> I normally do all my packages with RPM and I'm afraid doing PHP from
> >> source will mess this up. What will happen if I install PHP 4.3.0 from
> >> source now, and later do an update on a more recent version with rpm?
> >> Would I have to deinstall 4.3.0 first? How?
>
> You're right. Its good practice to use your package system wherever
> possible. However, how about using a RPM source package?
>
> ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/7.3/en/os/i386/SRPMS/php-4.1.2-
> 7.src.rpm
Hello Matthew, thanks for your reaction. Would using a src RPM make any
difference? I guess I would do a ./configure, make and make install and
wonder just as much where alle the binaries etc. have ended up as if
when I had used a tarball source install (pardon my Dutch :-).
Are applications made ("maked") from source RPMs easier to deinstall as
apps made from tarball sources?
TIA!