Re: PostgreSQL Perl Module - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Lamar Owen
Subject Re: PostgreSQL Perl Module
Date
Msg-id 380E1622.17C100A8@wgcr.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PostgreSQL Perl Module  (Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>)
List pgsql-hackers
Thomas Lockhart wrote:
> 
> > I have downloaded and installed your packaged RPM for the Pg.pm module for
> > PostgreSQL 6.5.1 on RedHat 6.0 i386 linux and cannot be found by perl.
> > Is my problem unique? When I run a perl script with 'use Pg;' in it I get:
> > Can't locate Pg.pm in @INC (@INC contains: /usr/lib/perl5/5.00503/i386-linux /usr/lib/perl5/5.00503
/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.005/i386-linux/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.005 .) at ../src/Perl/pg.pl line 1.
 
> > BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at ../src/Perl/pg.pl line 1.
> > The Pg.pm has been installed into:
> > /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl
> 
> I haven't had the chance to use much perl in the last year or two, but
> it may be that the default @INC does not include the directories we
> used for the installation. Also, the RPMs were generated on a RH5.2
> system, which may have a slightly different configuration.
[snip]
> which seems to be consistant. One thing you can try is to add
> /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl to INC at the top of your program and see if
> that helps. Try:

Won't help.  RedHat 5.2's perl is much older than RedHat 6.0's, and
there are other major incompatibilities for compiled modules.  Not to
mention the directory differences in the install.  I recommend that
anyone who wants to use the RPM's with non-standard perl versions
rebuild from the source RPM, since the perl client is highly sensitive
to versioning problems.
> include RPMs generated specifically for RH6.0, but Lamar had just put
> out a request for someone to test the RH6.1-generated RPMs on a RH6.0
> machine to see if they are compatible. If you have time, I'm sure he
> would appreciate trying that out.

Yes, that would be NICE. The perl version is the same for 6.1 as for
6.0.

--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Planning final assault on query length limits
Next
From: Vince Vielhaber
Date:
Subject: distinct. Is this the correct behaviour?