Well, there's not much discussion here. Other than the fact that a few
things depend on libpq.so.3.
Isn't the standard to keep libpq.so.(n-1) whenever you bump the number up ?
Dave
Volkan YAZICI wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On 5/19/05, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
>
>>8.0.2 and up should provide/require libpq.so.4 and so on. Apparently
>>there is something broken with this set of RPMs.
>>
>>
>
>For futher of the discussion:
>http://lists.pgfoundry.org/pipermail/pgsqlrpms-hackers/2005-April/000197.html
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 3: 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
>
>
>
>
