Re: RPM RH9.0 conflict with unixODBC - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Gaetano Mendola
Subject Re: RPM RH9.0 conflict with unixODBC
Date
Msg-id 3FC3AFE7.6060808@bigfoot.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: RPM RH9.0 conflict with unixODBC  ("Sander Steffann" <steffann@nederland.net>)
Responses Re: RPM RH9.0 conflict with unixODBC  (Steve Wampler <swampler@noao.edu>)
List pgsql-general
Sander Steffann wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>>>this are the rpm for 9.0:
>>>3768418 Nov 24 10:07 postgresql-7.4-0.3PGDG.i386.rpm
>>
>>>and this for rhas-2.1:
>>>2080872 Nov 24 10:08 postgresql-7.4-0.3PGDG.i386.rpm
>>
>>>how you can see the sizes are completely different.
>>>Am I missing something ?
>>
>>Compiler version and flags.  Although that is a substantial difference.
>
> The
>
>>rhas-2.1 compiler is the Red Hat gcc 2.96, and the RH9 compiler is gcc 3.
>>Apparently gcc 3 generates large code.  Sander, can you verify this, since
>>you built both of these?
>
>
> The file sizes are correct. I can't explain the huge difference though...
> They both contain the same files, and are built from the same specfile. The
> only difference between the build commands is that the RedHat 9 RPMs are
> built with --define 'build89 1', and the RHEL RPMs are built with --define
> 'build7x 1' and --define 'plperl 0'. The exclusion of plperl shouldn't make
> a difference in this RPM, only in the postgresql-pl RPM...
>
> In short: both filesizes are correct, and I can't explain it :(
> Sander.

However 6MB of difference for postgresql-server-7.4-0.3PGDG.i386.rpm
and     2.2 MB for postgresql-contrib-7.4-0.3PGDG.i386.rpm
are too much !


I'd like to have time to dig on it...


Regards
Gaetano Mendola



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "Jason Tesser"
Date:
Subject: Re: pam authentication for postgres
Next
From: Steve Wampler
Date:
Subject: Re: RPM RH9.0 conflict with unixODBC