| From: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruno Friedmann <bruno(at)ioda-net(dot)ch>, Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | pgsql-pkg-yum(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Devrim Gündüz <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #18833: libpq.so doesn't contain declared symbol in rpm --provides |
| Date: | 2025-03-11 12:44:55 |
| Message-ID: | 159a80a731ccf6126f20f7a50ce708a905407798.camel@cybertec.at |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-pkg-yum |
On Tue, 2025-03-11 at 13:36 +0100, Bruno Friedmann wrote:
> PGDG is claiming 100% ABI compatibility, which has been proved here
> that's not the case and all this bug is about this.
Are we claiming that?
Let me get that straight: you are requesting from the PostgreSQL
project that the binaries that they build for their own software
should be drop-in replacements for PostgreSQL packages that somebody
else builds. Interesting. I thought it should be the other way
around, if anything.
But we seem to have left the grounds of "let's make things work",
so I'll stop here.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | BharatDB | 2025-03-11 15:02:16 | Datatype mismatch warning in logical replication when creating subscription |
| Previous Message | BharatDB | 2025-03-11 12:37:19 | Fwd: Test mail for pgsql-hackers |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andreas Rogge | 2025-03-11 17:25:18 | Re: BUG #18833: libpq.so doesn't contain declared symbol in rpm --provides |
| Previous Message | Bruno Friedmann | 2025-03-11 12:36:53 | Re: BUG #18833: libpq.so doesn't contain declared symbol in rpm --provides |