From: | Ashesh Vashi <ashesh(dot)vashi(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PATCH: Compiling PostgreSQL using ActiveState Python 3.2 |
Date: | 2011-08-18 09:21:44 |
Message-ID: | CAG7mmowcb_Nwe-3xg8TRpk8bQ1-pFi=pncMVfZ+k15U=s8REMw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Please ignore the previous patch.
Please find the updated patch.
--
Thanks & Regards,
Ashesh Vashi
EnterpriseDB INDIA: Enterprise PostgreSQL Company<http://www.enterprisedb.com>
*http://www.linkedin.com/in/asheshvashi*<http://www.linkedin.com/in/asheshvashi>
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Ashesh Vashi <
ashesh(dot)vashi(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 1:25 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
>> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
>> > On ons, 2011-08-17 at 13:20 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> >> It's not immediately apparent to me why we should think that
>> >> get_python_lib is less trustworthy than LIBPL; but if someone
>> >> can make that case, I don't have any objection to this part of
>> >> the patch.
>>
>> > The issue, at least for me, is that the file isn't necessarily called
>> > 'config' anymore. I have
>> > /usr/lib/python3.2/config-3.2mu
>>
> One of the reason, I say that - we do have hard-coded values for the config
> directory.
> Hence, I used the LIBPL.
>
>>
>> Ah, I see.
>>
>> > LIBPL exists at least as far back as Python 2.2, so its use should be
>> > safe.
>>
>> Yeah, that part of the patch seems sane then.
>>
>> > Yes, because get_config_vars('LDVERSION') doesn't exist in that version.
>> > In theory, it would return '2.7', so everything would fit back together,
>> > but LDVERSION doesn't exist before 3.2.
>>
> Oops - sorry...
> I did not know about it..
>
>>
>> Could we have the code use 'LDVERSION' if it gets a nonempty result,
>> and otherwise fall back to the current scheme? But I guess first we
>> need some details as to why the current scheme isn't sufficient.
>>
> Please find the attached patch as you suggested.
>
> Reason:
> - As per my findings, ActiveState Python 3.2 does not provide shared
> libraries along with it.
> (Though - I am not sure about the earlier version of ActiveState Python)
> We can confirm the same using the following command:
> ${PYTHON} -c "import distutils.sysconfig,string;
> print(distutils.sysconfig.get_config_vars('Py_ENABLE_SHARED'))"
> Which returns in this case '0'.
>
> And, getting values for the 'python_ldlibrary' and 'python_so' are
> 'libpython3.2m.a' and '.cpython-32m.so' respectively.
> So, the condition - *x"${python_ldlibrary}" != x"${ldlibrary}"* is always
> failing, and switching it back to link the old way.
>
> --
>
> Thanks & Regards,
>
> Ashesh Vashi
> EnterpriseDB INDIA: Enterprise PostgreSQL Company<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
>
>
>
> *http://www.linkedin.com/in/asheshvashi*<http://www.linkedin.com/in/asheshvashi>
>
>
>>
>> regards, tom lane
>>
>
>
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
pg9.1beta3_python_v3.patch | application/octet-stream | 4.2 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Shigeru Hanada | 2011-08-18 09:43:07 | Re: Change format of FDW options used in \d* commands |
Previous Message | Marcin Mańk | 2011-08-18 07:57:52 | Re: FATAL: ReleaseSavepoint: unexpected state STARTED |