Re: pg9 beta1, make check fails - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Andy Colson
Subject Re: pg9 beta1, make check fails
Date
Msg-id 4BE03434.4020402@squeakycode.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg9 beta1, make check fails  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-general
On 5/4/2010 9:37 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andy Colson<andy@squeakycode.net>  writes:
>> On 5/3/2010 9:44 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I'm not immediately seeing a simple way to improve this.
>
>> How about building a statically linked psql in 'make check', just for
>> pg_regress to use?
>
> [ shrug... ]  That sort of defeats the purpose of testing the binaries
> we are intending to install.
>
> Actually I guess the real question here is why psql failed to link to
> the newly-built shared libraries.  pg_regress sets up LD_LIBRARY_PATH
> but that seems not to have done the trick for you.  What platform are
> you on exactly?
>
>             regards, tom lane

Slackware 64:

# uname -a
Linux mapper 2.6.32.7 #1 SMP Fri Jan 29 21:04:54 CST 2010 x86_64 AMD
Athlon(tm) II X2 245 Processor AuthenticAMD GNU/Linux

I do have /usr/local/pgsql/lib in my /etc/ld.so.conf.  Not sure how
ldconfig and LD_LIBRARY_PATH interact.

 > [ shrug... ]  That sort of defeats the purpose of testing the binaries
 > we are intending to install.

True, yea, but, I wonder how many times, it has used the previous
versions .so's?  In which case you are testing the new server with the
old client.  And never really knew.  I'v tried out several versions
since I started with 8.0, and I'll bet I do make; make check; more often
than not.  How many of those times picked up the prior .so's?  I'd bet
quite a few.

-Andy

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
Date:
Subject: Re: Avoiding surrogate keys
Next
From: Leif Biberg Kristensen
Date:
Subject: Re: GeSHi module for Postgresql?