Re: Pet Peeves?

On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 20:38:06 +0000
Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:

>
> rhubbell <Rhubbell(at)iHubbell(dot)com> writes:
>
> > Nope, had to find it in another package called libpq-dev.
> > That's on UbuntuHardy. Maybe it's a maintainer problem?
> >
> > What logic would lead someone to separate pg_config from everything else?
> > Do people often just install the server and nothing else? Then what?
>
> This is actually *required* by Debian/Ubuntu packaging rules.
>
> The development environment must be packaged separately from shared libraries
> like libpq or else major snafus arise when a new soversion of libpq comes out.
> You need to be able to have both versions installed simultaneously (in case
> you have programs which require both) but that won't work if they both contain
> things like header files or executables.

Weren't .so born from a need to save disk space? Maybe startup speed too.
Now they're a PITA.

>
> > BTW I ran into the need for pg_config upon installing DBD::Pg.
> > Maybe DBD::Pg maintainer problem?
>
> Installing a package for DBD::Pg or building it? The former would indeed be a
> package bug.

When I installed the package I did via CPAN so maybe this was my mistake.
Not every CPAN package is packaged for debian so I often times don't bother
checking if a perl module exists in debian I just do
perl -MCPAN -e 'install (DBD::Pg)' or whatever pkg....