Thread: [bug fix or improvement?] Correctly place DLLs for ECPG apps in bin folder

Hello,

The attached patch implements the below proposal, and moves libecpg.dll,
libecpg_compat.dll, and libpgtypes.dll from lib to bin folder on Windows,
where they should be.

http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/10470B394DB8486F93AC60107CC44C8B@maumau

As Andrew-san said, I don't expect it to be back-ported.

In addition, I'll remove libpq.dll from lib folder unless somebody objects.
Currently, libpq.dll is placed in both bin and lib.  I guess libpq.dll was
left in lib because it was considered necessary for ECPG DLLs.

Would removing libpq.dll from lib cause any problem?  No.  The following
modules in lib need libpq.dll when they are loaded by postgres.exe by
LoadLibrary().  But the necessary libpq.dll is loaded from bin folder.
According to the DLL search order rule, DLLs are loaded from the same folder
as the loading program, which is postgres.exe in our case.

dblink.dll
libpqwalreceiver.dll
postgres_fdw.dll

Regards
MauMau

From: "MauMau" <maumau307@gmail.com>
> In addition, I'll remove libpq.dll from lib folder unless somebody
> objects.
> Currently, libpq.dll is placed in both bin and lib.  I guess libpq.dll was
> left in lib because it was considered necessary for ECPG DLLs.

The attached patch also removes libpq.dll from lib folder.  I don't mind
whether this patch or yesterday's one will be adopted.  I'll add this to
2014-1 commitfest this weekend if the patch is not committed until then.

Regards
MauMau

You should be able to do this without specifically referencing the names
"libpq" or "ecpg".  Look into the Makefile, if it defines
SO_MAJOR_VERSION, then it's a library you are concerned with, and then
do the copying or moving.

From: "Asif Naeem" <anaeem.it@gmail.com>
> Other than my pervious comments, patch looks good to me. Thanks.

Thanks for reviewing.  I understood that your previous comment was to 
suggest copying the desired DLLs directly from Release/Debug folder to bin. 
But I'm afraid it cannot be done cleanly...  CopySolutionOutput() copies all 
DLLS to lib folder with no exception as follows:
  if ($1 == 1)  {   $dir = "bin";   $ext = "exe";  }  elsif ($1 == 2)  {   $dir = "lib";   $ext = "dll";  }

It seems like I have to do something like this, listing the relevant DLL 
names anyway.  I don't think this is not cleaner.
  if ($1 == 1)  {   $dir = "bin";   $ext = "exe";  }  elsif ($1 == 2 && /* the project is libpq, libecpg, etc. */)  {
$dir= "bin";   $ext = "dll";  }  elsif ($1 == 2)  {   $dir = "lib";   $ext = "dll";  }
 

What do you think?  Am I misunderstanding your suggestion?

Regards
MauMau

Asif Naeem wrote:
> Yes. Can you please take a look at Win_lib_bin.patch I shared earlier ?, I
> think it is or similar approach will be appropriate. Thanks.

I think the suggestion by Peter Eisentraut upthread was pretty
reasonable -- the Makefiles are already aware that they are building a
shared library, so scrape the info off them.  The less hardcoded stuff
in the msvc framework, the better.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

From: "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
> I think the suggestion by Peter Eisentraut upthread was pretty
> reasonable -- the Makefiles are already aware that they are building a
> shared library, so scrape the info off them.  The less hardcoded stuff
> in the msvc framework, the better.

I overlooked his mail.  Do you mean something like this? (I don't know yet 
how to express this in Perl)

for each Makefile in under top_dir_in_source_tree or src/interfaces
{ if (Makefile contains SO_MAJOR_VERSION) {   extract NAME value from Makefile   move lib/lib${NAME}.dll to bin/ }
}

But the source tree contains as many as 206 Makefiles.  I'm worried that it 
will waste the install time.  Should all these Makefiles be examined, or 16 
Makefiles in src/interfaces/?

Regards
MauMau

This patch has been sitting in the commitfest with no activity since 
this email from July. What's the real status, who's got the ball on this 
one? Please update the commitfest app accordingly. If nothing happens in 
the next few days, I'll mark this as Returned with Feedback.

On 07/09/2014 03:53 PM, MauMau wrote:
> From: "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
>> I think the suggestion by Peter Eisentraut upthread was pretty
>> reasonable -- the Makefiles are already aware that they are building a
>> shared library, so scrape the info off them.  The less hardcoded stuff
>> in the msvc framework, the better.
>
> I overlooked his mail.  Do you mean something like this? (I don't know yet
> how to express this in Perl)
>
> for each Makefile in under top_dir_in_source_tree or src/interfaces
> {
>    if (Makefile contains SO_MAJOR_VERSION)
>    {
>      extract NAME value from Makefile
>      move lib/lib${NAME}.dll to bin/
>    }
> }
>
> But the source tree contains as many as 206 Makefiles.  I'm worried that it
> will waste the install time.  Should all these Makefiles be examined, or 16
> Makefiles in src/interfaces/?
>
> Regards
> MauMau
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
- Heikki

On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 9:53 PM, MauMau <maumau307@gmail.com> wrote:
> But the source tree contains as many as 206 Makefiles.  I'm worried that it
> will waste the install time.  Should all these Makefiles be examined, or 16
> Makefiles in src/interfaces/?
Not really. IMO the best solution is to extract the path of the
Makefile in the vcxproj file of the project in Install.pm by looking
at ModuleDefinitionFile or ResourceFile, and then to scan it for
SO_MAJOR_VERSION. This way it is possible to determine in
CopySolutionOutput where a library needs to be copied. I'd also rather
go with the def file, and not the rc file for the path identification.
-- 
Michael