psqlODBC 08.02.0300 doesn"t compile

Looks like a header file is missing from the tarball?

gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I. -I/home/tgl/testversion/include -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic -MT loadlib.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/loadlib.Tpo -c loadlib.c -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/loadlib.o
loadlib.c:19:22: error: pgenlist.h: No such file or directory
make[1]: *** [loadlib.lo] Error 1

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at

http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

Re: psqlODBC 08.02.0300 doesn"t compile

From: "Tom Lane"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 4:30 AM
Subject: [ODBC] psqlODBC 08.02.0300 doesn't compile


> Looks like a header file is missing from the tarball?
>
> gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I. -I/home/tgl/testversion/include -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions
> -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic -MT loadlib.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/loadlib.Tpo -c
> loadlib.c -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/loadlib.o
> loadlib.c:19:22: error: pgenlist.h: No such file or directory
> make[1]: *** [loadlib.lo] Error 1

Uga.. It is my mistake...I seemed to take the submitted library foolishly and to be different.




---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Re: psqlODBC 08.02.0300 doesn"t compile

Hi Dave...

/home/*/psqlODBC08020300

-rw-r--r-- 1 hiroshi users 691861 Apr 24 20:05 psqlodbc-08.02.0300.tar.gz
-rw-r--r-- 1 hiroshi users 54396 Apr 24 20:05 psqlodbc-08.02.0300.tar.gz-LOG.txt
-rw-r--r-- 1 hiroshi users 65 Apr 24 20:05 psqlodbc-08.02.0300.tar.gz.sig

this is gpg detach-sign and make log..
Ahh... Sorry.. It is necessary to renew the library.
Should the name do the number in the increment?

Regards,
Hiroshi Saito


----- Original Message -----
From: "Hiroshi Saito"
To: ; "Tom Lane"
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 4:49 AM
Subject: Re: [ODBC] psqlODBC 08.02.0300 doesn't compile


> From: "Tom Lane"
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 4:30 AM
> Subject: [ODBC] psqlODBC 08.02.0300 doesn't compile
>
>
>> Looks like a header file is missing from the tarball?
>>
>> gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I. -I/home/tgl/testversion/include -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions
>> -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic -MT loadlib.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/loadlib.Tpo -c
>> loadlib.c -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/loadlib.o
>> loadlib.c:19:22: error: pgenlist.h: No such file or directory
>> make[1]: *** [loadlib.lo] Error 1
>
> Uga.. It is my mistake...I seemed to take the submitted library foolishly and to be different.
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly



---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Re: psqlODBC 08.02.0300 doesn"t compile

Hiroshi Saito wrote:
> Hi Dave...
>
> /home/*/psqlODBC08020300
>
> -rw-r--r-- 1 hiroshi users 691861 Apr 24 20:05
> psqlodbc-08.02.0300.tar.gz
> -rw-r--r-- 1 hiroshi users 54396 Apr 24 20:05
> psqlodbc-08.02.0300.tar.gz-LOG.txt
> -rw-r--r-- 1 hiroshi users 65 Apr 24 20:05
> psqlodbc-08.02.0300.tar.gz.sig
>
> this is gpg detach-sign and make log..
> Ahh... Sorry.. It is necessary to renew the library.
> Should the name do the number in the increment?

Yes, because the release was announced, I think we should produce
08.02.0400. Don't forget the release notes!

BTW; use 'make distcheck' when you build the tarball. That will build
it, and then test it to make sure it compiles OK.

Regards, Dave.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

Re: psqlODBC 08.02.0300 doesn"t compile

From: "Dave Page"

>> this is gpg detach-sign and make log..
>> Ahh... Sorry.. It is necessary to renew the library.
>> Should the name do the number in the increment?
>
> Yes, because the release was announced, I think we should produce
> 08.02.0400. Don't forget the release notes!

Thanks!,
I apologizes for having publicly caused the trouble due to my failure.:-(
However, I firmly continue working. I want to straighten the preparation
soon. Then, surely.!

>
> BTW; use 'make distcheck' when you build the tarball. That will build
> it, and then test it to make sure it compiles OK.

Yea, Thanks!

Regards,
Hiroshi Saito


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at

http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

Re: psqlODBC 08.02.0300 doesn"t compile

There's another issue with the psqlodbc tarball, which has been there
awhile but I only just realized what it is: you are shipping aclocal.m4,
which is a derived file, without providing the upstream files needed to
recreate it. Specifically, there's no sign of a source file for the
PGAC_xxx macros needed by configure.ac.

This makes life difficult for packagers who need to re-run aclocal
(in my case, because Red Hat ships a different automake version than
you guys are using). I believe it's also a violation of the LGPL.

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

Re: psqlODBC 08.02.0300 doesn"t compile

Tom Lane wrote:
> There's another issue with the psqlodbc tarball, which has been there
> awhile but I only just realized what it is: you are shipping aclocal.m4,
> which is a derived file, without providing the upstream files needed to
> recreate it. Specifically, there's no sign of a source file for the
> PGAC_xxx macros needed by configure.ac.
>
> This makes life difficult for packagers who need to re-run aclocal
> (in my case, because Red Hat ships a different automake version than
> you guys are using). I believe it's also a violation of the LGPL.

Hmm, thats how Peter designed it for us so we didn't have to have our
own copies of all the PG macros iirc. I don't have enough autoconf foo
to know how best to fix it though. Peter?

Regards, Dave

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq

Re: psqlODBC 08.02.0300 doesn"t compile

Dave Page writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> This makes life difficult for packagers who need to re-run aclocal
>> (in my case, because Red Hat ships a different automake version than
>> you guys are using). I believe it's also a violation of the LGPL.

> Hmm, thats how Peter designed it for us so we didn't have to have our
> own copies of all the PG macros iirc. I don't have enough autoconf foo
> to know how best to fix it though. Peter?

Hm, so you're pulling those macros directly from the underlying Postgres
installation? I didn't think they got installed anywhere --- I could do
the same if they are, but not if running aclocal requires access to a
Postgres source tree.

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match

Re: psqlODBC 08.02.0300 doesn"t compile

Tom Lane wrote:
> Dave Page writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> This makes life difficult for packagers who need to re-run aclocal
>>> (in my case, because Red Hat ships a different automake version than
>>> you guys are using). I believe it's also a violation of the LGPL.
>
>> Hmm, thats how Peter designed it for us so we didn't have to have our
>> own copies of all the PG macros iirc. I don't have enough autoconf foo
>> to know how best to fix it though. Peter?
>
> Hm, so you're pulling those macros directly from the underlying Postgres
> installation? I didn't think they got installed anywhere --- I could do
> the same if they are, but not if running aclocal requires access to a
> Postgres source tree.

No, it's built in a pre-configured source tree under src/interfaces. See
http://cvs.pgfoundry.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/~checkout~/psqlo dbc/psqlodbc/docs/unix-compilation.html?rev=1.4
- the 'Building a distribution' section is the set of instructions that
Peter wrote.

Regards, Dave.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

Re: psqlODBC 08.02.0300 doesn"t compile

Dave Page writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hm, so you're pulling those macros directly from the underlying Postgres
>> installation? I didn't think they got installed anywhere --- I could do
>> the same if they are, but not if running aclocal requires access to a
>> Postgres source tree.

> No, it's built in a pre-configured source tree under src/interfaces. See
> http://cvs.pgfoundry.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/~checkout~/psqlo dbc/psqlodbc/docs/unix-compilation.html?rev=1.4
> - the 'Building a distribution' section is the set of instructions that
> Peter wrote.

Well, this is exactly the problem: the psqlodbc distribution is missing
files needed to build from source, ie, the reference to $PGSRC/config
in the directions. Since $PGSRC/config is also not installed by
Postgres packages, this leaves RPM packagers unable to build psqlodbc
according to the rules. The whole thing seems like bad practice anyway,
since it's unclear which version of the Postgres sources needs to be
used to build any particular psqlodbc release.

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at

http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

Re: psqlODBC 08.02.0300 doesn"t compile

Tom Lane wrote:
> Well, this is exactly the problem: the psqlodbc distribution is missing
> files needed to build from source, ie, the reference to $PGSRC/config
> in the directions. Since $PGSRC/config is also not installed by
> Postgres packages, this leaves RPM packagers unable to build psqlodbc
> according to the rules.

I don't know about the RPM packaging rules, but you can build from
source just fine as long as you don't try to regenerate any of the
autoconf/automake stuff. The lack of complaints since it started being
packaged this way indicate it's not been an issue for the users.

> The whole thing seems like bad practice anyway,
> since it's unclear which version of the Postgres sources needs to be
> used to build any particular psqlodbc release.

I've always used whatever is current without any problems, though the
docs say to use 7.3 (which, iirc, was about to be released when this was
all written). I'm not experienced enough with this stuff to comment on
whether it's good or bad practice though; I'll have to leave you and
Peter to fight that one out. It can be a pita sometimes though, and it
would be nice to have something more self contained.

Regards, Dave.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

Re: psqlODBC 08.02.0300 doesn"t compile

Dave Page writes:
> I don't know about the RPM packaging rules, but you can build from
> source just fine as long as you don't try to regenerate any of the
> autoconf/automake stuff.

Not really an option for me, since I need to insert the same libtool
version that is used on whichever Red Hat distribution I'm building for.

In any case, the other point is that you're failing to distribute the
complete source code as defined by the LGPL license you're using
(ie, the "preferred form of the work for making modifications" ---
derived files ain't it).

Being the authors, you can of course do whatever you want, but it's
arguably illegal for Red Hat or other packagers to redistribute this
package, since we are likewise failing to provide the complete source
code.

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at

http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

Re: psqlODBC 08.02.0300 doesn"t compile

Tom Lane wrote:
> Dave Page writes:
>> I don't know about the RPM packaging rules, but you can build from
>> source just fine as long as you don't try to regenerate any of the
>> autoconf/automake stuff.
>
> Not really an option for me, since I need to insert the same libtool
> version that is used on whichever Red Hat distribution I'm building for.
>
> In any case, the other point is that you're failing to distribute the
> complete source code as defined by the LGPL license you're using
> (ie, the "preferred form of the work for making modifications" ---
> derived files ain't it).
>
> Being the authors, you can of course do whatever you want, but it's
> arguably illegal for Red Hat or other packagers to redistribute this
> package, since we are likewise failing to provide the complete source
> code.

That's only an issue if we (as copyright holders) should take action of
course - which would be a pretty stupid thing to do - but I see your
point, and can imagine the nervous ticks your lawyers would probably
develop :-)

Regards, Dav e.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match

Re: psqlODBC 08.02.0300 doesn"t compile

Am Mittwoch, 25. April 2007 17:16 schrieb Tom Lane:
> There's another issue with the psqlodbc tarball, which has been there
> awhile but I only just realized what it is: you are shipping aclocal.m4=
,
> which is a derived file, without providing the upstream files needed to
> recreate it. =A0Specifically, there's no sign of a source file for the
> PGAC_xxx macros needed by configure.ac.

It appears that 08.02.0400 doesn't use PGAC macros anymore. However, the=
=20
configure.ac file looks like a disaster now.

--=20
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org