> On 30 Apr 2025, at 19:59, Jacob Champion <jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 5:55 AM Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> wrote:
>> Nitpick, but it won't be .so everywhere. Would this be clearar if spelled out
>> with something like "do not rely on libpq-int.h when building libpq-oauth as
>> dynamic shared lib"?
>
> I went with "do not rely on libpq-int.h in dynamic builds of
> libpq-oauth", since devs are hopefully going to be the only people who
> see it. I've also fixed up an errant #endif label right above it.
That's indeed better than my suggestion.
> I'd ideally like to get a working split in for beta.
+Many
> Barring
> objections, I plan to get this pushed tomorrow so that the buildfarm
> has time to highlight any corner cases well before the Saturday
> freeze.
I'll try to kick the tyres a bit more as well.
--
Daniel Gustafsson
