Re: Re: [PATCHES] patch for minor Win32 makefile bug
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: [PATCHES] patch for minor Win32 makefile bug |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 309.986359448@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Re: [PATCHES] patch for minor Win32 makefile bug (Jason Tishler <Jason.Tishler@dothill.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: [PATCHES] patch for minor Win32 makefile bug
|
Список | pgsql-ports |
Jason Tishler <Jason.Tishler@dothill.com> writes: > On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 06:03:45PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Hmm. It seems a little bit weird (no, a lot weird) to be referencing >> -lpostgres for the client-side interface library builds. I can see that >> the PL-language DLLs might need to reference -lpostgres during their >> links, but I've got severe doubts that this is a good idea anyplace >> else. > You are correct. I just verified by using MS's dumpbin that none > of the above DLLs except for plpgsql.dll actually import any symbols > from libpostgres.a. Hence, linking the client-side interface libraries > with libpostgres.a is superfluous. > However, you missed a few regression test related DLLs. See below for > details. Good point; those DLLs link into the backend. Maybe Makefile.win should define FE_DLLLIBS (for frontend libraries) and BE_DLLLIBS (for backend libraries). That would require any particular Makefile that's building a DLL to select one or the other to define DLLLIBS as, before it could include Makefile.shlib. Is that approach good for clarity, or too much of a pain-in-the-neck? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-ports по дате отправления: