Re: pg 10.1 missing libpq in postgresql-devel

From: Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com>
To: support-tiger <support(at)tigernassau(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg 10.1 missing libpq in postgresql-devel
Date: 2018-01-29 20:25:48
Message-ID: 05ddb20a-26cc-464c-86f2-eff1c0475489@aklaver.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On 01/29/2018 11:18 AM, support-tiger wrote:
> On 01/27/2018 06:43 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
>
>> On 01/27/2018 04:34 PM, support-tiger wrote:
>>> sorry for delay but ran some tests on older version pg gem - still fails
>>
>> With what error message?
>>
>> What Ruby gem?
>>
>>>
>>> it fails on building the config file with simply missing libpq-fe.h,
>>> cannot find libpq-fe.h
>>
>> Well it is there:
>>
>> rpm -qlp postgresql10-devel-10.1-1PGDG.f27.x86_64.rpm | grep libpq-fe.h
>> warning: postgresql10-devel-10.1-1PGDG.f27.x86_64.rpm: Header V4
>> DSA/SHA1 Signature, key ID 442df0f8: NOKEY
>> /usr/pgsql-10/include/libpq-fe.h
>>
>>>
>>> I suspect it is a problem with using the pgdg repository and that
>>> postgresql get "10" added to them ie postgresql10-devel and maybe the
>>> gem code does not recognize that.   Since vers 10 is not breaking it
>>> does not make sense (i guess fedora)  to rename vers 10 with the "10"
>>> - maybe they just love the python 2 / 3 fiasco and want to extend it
>>> to postgresql.
>>
>> Previous versions used version numbering also:
>>
>> https://yum.postgresql.org/9.6/fedora/fedora-26-x86_64/
>>
>> postgresql96-devel-9.6.6-1PGDG.f26.x86_64.rpm
>>
>> My guess it that the config script for the gem is not taking into
>> account that Postgres changed from a three part versioning system
>> X.Y.z to a two part system X.y(where lower case is minor version) from
>> 9.6.0 to 10.1.
>
> could be, cannot find the config file in the repository - specifies to
> use a pg-config file to build the gem but no trace of such a config file

It is not looking for a file named pg-config, it is looking for a
program named pg_config.

See:

https://deveiate.org/code/pg/

gem install pg -- --with-pg-config=<path to pg_config>

Try something like below to verify pg_config is installed(I'm sure it is):

aklaver(at)tito:~> pg_config
BINDIR = /usr/local/pgsql96/bin
DOCDIR = /usr/local/pgsql96/share/doc
HTMLDIR = /usr/local/pgsql96/share/doc

...

LIBS = -lpgcommon -lpgport -lxml2 -lssl -lcrypto -lz -lreadline -lrt
-lcrypt -ldl -lm
VERSION = PostgreSQL 9.6.6

*IMPORTANT* If you have more then one instance of Postgres installed you
will have more then one pg_config binary, so it is important that you
point the gem install at the correct one.

>
> thks anyway for your help.  had emailed the pg gem leads but no response
> and github issues are blocked (duh)  - can't depend on this -will just
> make a faster transition to Crystal - the pg shard in Crystal loaded
> okay on Fedora with the 10.1

Are you talking about this?:

https://github.com/ged/ruby-pg

The above is a Git mirror of the 'real' repo, which is on BitBucket:

https://bitbucket.org/ged/ruby-pg/wiki/Home

You will find an issues page there.
>
>
>
>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 01/25/2018 03:59 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
>>>> On 01/25/2018 12:20 PM, support-tiger wrote:
>>>>> running postgresql 10.1 on Fedora 27. Cannot install ruby pg gem
>>>>> due to missing libpq-fe.h file. This is usually found in
>>>>> postgresql-devel but
>>>>
>>>> What was the error message returned when you tried to install
>>>> originally?
>>>>
>>>>> it is not in fedora 27 postgresql10-devel. If install
>>>>> postgresql-devel (9.6) the gem installs without problem but afraid
>>>>> this will interfere with 10.1  How can we install the necessary
>>>>> libpq-fe.h  ? thks
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

--
Adrian Klaver
adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tomas Vondra 2018-01-29 20:35:50 Re: EXPLAIN BUFFERS: dirtied
Previous Message Paul A Jungwirth 2018-01-29 20:02:39 Re: Using AWS ephemeral SSD storage for production database workload?