| From: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hiroshi Inoue <inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: libpq naming on Win64 |
| Date: | 2010-01-07 12:28:37 |
| Message-ID: | 937d27e11001070428o4ac42bf1lc1e9da56febd91f7@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 12:21 PM, Hiroshi Inoue <inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 3:58 AM, Hiroshi Inoue <inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
>>>
>>> Maybe I'm missing the point and have a question.
>>>
>>> For example, do 32bit psql and the 64bit one have the same name?
>>> If so, where will they be installed?
>>
>> I'm only talking about libpq. I see no reason to have 32 & 64 bit
>> versions of other utilities installed in parallel.
>
> Well what about the libraries (e.g openssl) libpq links?
Yes, that is an issue as I noted earlier. We probably would still have
to put the 32 bit and 64 bit libraries in a different directory
because of their naming conventions.
--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-01-07 12:34:06 | Re: 'replication' keyword on .pgpass (Streaming Replication) |
| Previous Message | Hiroshi Inoue | 2010-01-07 12:21:53 | Re: libpq naming on Win64 |