Re: Semi-undocumented functions in libpq - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Martijn van Oosterhout
Subject Re: Semi-undocumented functions in libpq
Date
Msg-id 20060504213319.GO4752@svana.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Semi-undocumented functions in libpq  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Semi-undocumented functions in libpq
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 03:21:56PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> AFAIK, everything that is in exports.txt was put there for a reason.
> I'm happy with the situation as it stands (other than wanting to enforce
> the exports.txt restriction on more platforms ...)

In that case, shouldn't we add to libpq-fe.h all the functions that
libpq is exporting?

> Did we come to a decision about whether to implement symbol versioning
> for libpq?

Not really. For distributors it's nice because it means that they don't
need to recompile the entire software stack just because a new postgres
release enters the archive. But for run-of-the-mill users who compile
postgres themselves, they won't notice one way or the other.

Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout   <kleptog@svana.org>   http://svana.org/kleptog/
> From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to litigate.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Jim C. Nasby"
Date:
Subject: [bruno@wolff.to: Re: [GENERAL] 8.1.4 anytime soon?]
Next
From: David Fetter
Date:
Subject: Re: pseudo-type record arguments for PL-functions