Op 5 Feb 2003 (0:54), schreef Matthew Horoschun <mhoroschun@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > Hi Jules, > > On Wednesday, February 5, 2003, at 12:06 AM, Peter De Muer (Work) > wrote: > > > try making a soft link libpq.so.2 to the libpq.so.3 file that comes > > with > > PHP 7.3.1. > >> > >> This is a known issue, but the only solution I could google was > >> compiling a recent PHP from source or creating a softlink from > >> libpq.so.3 to libpq.so.2. I read that the link is a bad solution, but > >> I > >> really don't like compiling and installing PHP from source. > > I think he wanted to avoid the soft link (or hard link for that > matter)... Its not a neat solution. Generally the whole reason for > changing library major numbers it to let the users know that the > exports have changed and that you'll need to recompile your client! > > http://www.postgresql.org/news.php?NewsID=105 > > >> I normally do all my packages with RPM and I'm afraid doing PHP from > >> source will mess this up. What will happen if I install PHP 4.3.0 from > >> source now, and later do an update on a more recent version with rpm? > >> Would I have to deinstall 4.3.0 first? How? > > You're right. Its good practice to use your package system wherever > possible. However, how about using a RPM source package? > > ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/7.3/en/os/i386/SRPMS/php-4.1.2- > 7.src.rpm Hello Matthew, thanks for your reaction. Would using a src RPM make any difference? I guess I would do a ./configure, make and make install and wonder just as much where alle the binaries etc. have ended up as if when I had used a tarball source install (pardon my Dutch :-). Are applications made ("maked") from source RPMs easier to deinstall as apps made from tarball sources? TIA!
