Re: Cygwin linking rules

2018-10-02 Thread Marco Atzeri
Am 02.10.2018 um 19:07 schrieb Tom Lane: Andrew Dunstan writes: On 09/29/2018 02:13 PM, Marco Atzeri wrote: [ proposed patch ] Yes. So there are a couple of things here. First, the dll has SO_MAJORVERSION in the name. And second it stops building any static libraries and instead builds wind

Re: Cygwin linking rules

2018-10-02 Thread Tom Lane
Marco Atzeri writes: > [ cygwin-soversion.diff ] Oh, one other minor comment on this patch: the rule for the "stlib" must not be just $(stlib): $(shlib) ; Something like this would work: $(stlib): $(shlib) touch $@ See e.g. the AIX case in Makefile.shlib, which is doing about the same

Re: Cygwin linking rules

2018-10-02 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan writes: > On 09/29/2018 02:13 PM, Marco Atzeri wrote: >> [ proposed patch ] > Yes. So there are a couple of things here. First, the dll has > SO_MAJORVERSION in the name. And second it stops building any static > libraries and instead builds windows import libraries with names li

Re: Cygwin linking rules

2018-09-30 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 09/29/2018 02:13 PM, Marco Atzeri wrote: building from git and using the attached patch that is used for all cygwin packages on latest cygwin $ uname -svrm CYGWIN_NT-10.0 2.11.1(0.329/5/3) 2018-09-05 10:24 x86_64 I do not see the problem == creating database "contrib_regre

Re: Cygwin linking rules

2018-09-29 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 09/29/2018 04:06 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan writes: Not sure where to go from here. What would happen if we stopped building libpq.a, so that the linker didn't have any choice about what to do? I will test Marco's patch, which I think does that, tomor

Re: Cygwin linking rules

2018-09-29 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan writes: > Not sure where to go from here. What would happen if we stopped building libpq.a, so that the linker didn't have any choice about what to do? regards, tom lane

Re: Cygwin linking rules

2018-09-29 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 09/29/2018 01:03 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: On 09/29/2018 12:09 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: On 09/29/2018 11:35 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Most of the buildfarm is now happy with the changes I made to have libpq + ecpg get src/port and src/common files via libraries ... but lorikeet isn't.  It

Re: Cygwin linking rules

2018-09-29 Thread Marco Atzeri
Am 29.09.2018 um 19:03 schrieb Andrew Dunstan: On 09/29/2018 12:09 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: On 09/29/2018 11:35 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Most of the buildfarm is now happy with the changes I made to have libpq + ecpg get src/port and src/common files via libraries ... but lorikeet isn't.  It ge

Re: Cygwin linking rules

2018-09-29 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 09/29/2018 12:09 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: On 09/29/2018 11:35 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Most of the buildfarm is now happy with the changes I made to have libpq + ecpg get src/port and src/common files via libraries ... but lorikeet isn't.  It gets through the core regression tests fine (so l

Re: Cygwin linking rules

2018-09-29 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 09/29/2018 11:35 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Most of the buildfarm is now happy with the changes I made to have libpq + ecpg get src/port and src/common files via libraries ... but lorikeet isn't. It gets through the core regression tests fine (so libpq, per se, works), but contrib/dblink fails: