Re: Examining the output of: ldd `which postgres` - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Examining the output of: ldd `which postgres`
Date
Msg-id 27469.1062805468@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Examining the output of: ldd `which postgres`  (Sean Chittenden <sean@chittenden.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
Sean Chittenden <sean@chittenden.org> writes:
>>> Is it really necessary for postgres to be linked with ncurses
>>> (288K) and readline (156K)?  It's .5M, not the end of the world,
>>> but it seems excessive.  I know the postmaster has a CLI
>>> interface, but does it really require ncurses or readline?  -sc

If you can figure out a reasonable way to develop separate LIBS lists
for the backend and the other executables, I'm willing to listen.
AFAICT autoconf is not really designed to generate multiple executables
with radically different library needs from a single configure script,
and so we'd probably end up having to have multiple configure scripts.
Which seems messier than it's worth.

(Of course, if you can show that there's a significant penalty in
backend launch time from having useless shlibs linked in, I'd get
more excited about it...)
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: C language context
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: FK type mismatches?