On Tue, Apr 8, 2025 at 10:00:56AM -0700, Jacob Champion wrote: > On Tue, Apr 8, 2025 at 9:49 AM Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 8, 2025 at 09:43:01AM -0700, Jacob Champion wrote: > > > By adding the new .so to a different package. For example, RPM specs > > > would just let you say "hey, this .so I just built doesn't go into the > > > main client package, it goes into an add-on that depends on the client > > > package." It's the same way separate client and server packages get > > > generated from the same single build of Postgres. > > > > Do we have any idea how many packagers are interested in doing this? > > I'm not sure how to answer this. The primary drivers from the dev side > are you and Tom, I think. Christoph seems to be on board with a split > as long as we don't make his life harder. Wolfgang appears to be a > packager who would not make use of a split (and in fact cannot).
Okay, I have just posted a more detailed email about my security concern, so let's look at that. I am ready to admit I am wrong. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com Do not let urgent matters crowd out time for investment in the future.
