Scott Ribe <scott_ribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Mar 22, 2015, at 4:43 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> So this works only if your libpq.dylib is actually installed at the >> location that was expected when you built it. The recipe you gave >> looks like it should have done that, but I'm suspicious that the >> answer is somewhere near here. > Oh, take me out back and shoot me now ;-) Uh huh :-( > It's questionable whether the PG executables should be built with full or relative paths to the libs, both have their own disadvantages. But might be worth considering --relative-rpath someday? Or an option to link the frickin' static libraries in and avoid the whole issue of mismatches. We're entirely at the mercy of the platform's dynamic loader when it comes to things like this. I don't think I trust Darwin's loader with relative paths; though come to think of it, Linux's loader may be no better. Way too many opportunities to screw up there. As for static libraries, there are good reasons why those aren't superior solutions. Red Hat for instance has a blanket policy against shipping static libraries (with only very narrow exceptions), and I believe the same is true of many other vendors. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
