Re: [HACKERS] Perl library (was Building Postgres)
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Perl library (was Building Postgres) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20693.930691925@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Perl library (was Building Postgres) (Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu> writes: >> Wouldn't it be better to create a CPAN package and distribute it from >> *there*? > Would a CPAN package be more amenable to an rpm packaging? That is, if > we had a CPAN distribution (generated locally, of course), could I > plop that into an rpm and have a standard, easy procedure to follow > within the rpm to get the stuff extracted and installed onto a > machine?? I'm blissfully ignorant about CPAN and the packaging > conventions, but would like suggestions. I believe that what you find in the interfaces/perl5 subdirectory *is* a CPAN package. Tarred and gzipped, that fileset could be submitted to CPAN (or it could be if it was self-contained, rather than dependent on libpq, that is). "perl Makefile.PL; make; make install" is precisely what Perl users expect to have to do with a CPAN package. I'm not sure if it's worth trying to come up with a self-contained CPAN package or not --- we could probably make one, using libpq sources and the necessary backend include files, but would it really be worth much to anyone who didn't also have a Postgres server? Seems like you need the full distribution anyway, in most situations. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: