Looks like a header file is missing from the tarball?

gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I. -I/home/tgl/testversion/include -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic -MT loadlib.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/loadlib.Tpo -c loadlib.c -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/loadlib.o
loadlib.c:19:22: error: pgenlist.h: No such file or directory
make[1]: *** [loadlib.lo] Error 1

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at

http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

From: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: <pgsql-odbc@postgreSQL.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 4:30 AM
Subject: [ODBC] psqlODBC 08.02.0300 doesn't compile


> Looks like a header file is missing from the tarball?
>
> gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I. -I/home/tgl/testversion/include -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions
> -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic -MT loadlib.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/loadlib.Tpo -c
> loadlib.c -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/loadlib.o
> loadlib.c:19:22: error: pgenlist.h: No such file or directory
> make[1]: *** [loadlib.lo] Error 1

Uga.. It is my mistake...I seemed to take the submitted library foolishly and to be different.
<sigh..>



---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Hi Dave...

/home/*/psqlODBC08020300

-rw-r--r-- 1 hiroshi users 691861 Apr 24 20:05 psqlodbc-08.02.0300.tar.gz
-rw-r--r-- 1 hiroshi users 54396 Apr 24 20:05 psqlodbc-08.02.0300.tar.gz-LOG.txt
-rw-r--r-- 1 hiroshi users 65 Apr 24 20:05 psqlodbc-08.02.0300.tar.gz.sig

this is gpg detach-sign and make log..
Ahh... Sorry.. It is necessary to renew the library.
Should the name do the number in the increment?

Regards,
Hiroshi Saito


----- Original Message -----
From: "Hiroshi Saito" <z-saito@guitar.ocn.ne.jp>
To: <pgsql-odbc@postgreSQL.org>; "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 4:49 AM
Subject: Re: [ODBC] psqlODBC 08.02.0300 doesn't compile


> From: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
> To: <pgsql-odbc@postgreSQL.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 4:30 AM
> Subject: [ODBC] psqlODBC 08.02.0300 doesn't compile
>
>
>> Looks like a header file is missing from the tarball?
>>
>> gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I. -I/home/tgl/testversion/include -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions
>> -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic -MT loadlib.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/loadlib.Tpo -c
>> loadlib.c -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/loadlib.o
>> loadlib.c:19:22: error: pgenlist.h: No such file or directory
>> make[1]: *** [loadlib.lo] Error 1
>
> Uga.. It is my mistake...I seemed to take the submitted library foolishly and to be different.
> <sigh..>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly



---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Hiroshi Saito wrote:
> Hi Dave...
>
> /home/*/psqlODBC08020300
>
> -rw-r--r-- 1 hiroshi users 691861 Apr 24 20:05
> psqlodbc-08.02.0300.tar.gz
> -rw-r--r-- 1 hiroshi users 54396 Apr 24 20:05
> psqlodbc-08.02.0300.tar.gz-LOG.txt
> -rw-r--r-- 1 hiroshi users 65 Apr 24 20:05
> psqlodbc-08.02.0300.tar.gz.sig
>
> this is gpg detach-sign and make log..
> Ahh... Sorry.. It is necessary to renew the library.
> Should the name do the number in the increment?

Yes, because the release was announced, I think we should produce
08.02.0400. Don't forget the release notes!

BTW; use 'make distcheck' when you build the tarball. That will build
it, and then test it to make sure it compiles OK.

Regards, Dave.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

From: "Dave Page" <dpage@postgresql.org>

>> this is gpg detach-sign and make log..
>> Ahh... Sorry.. It is necessary to renew the library.
>> Should the name do the number in the increment?
>
> Yes, because the release was announced, I think we should produce
> 08.02.0400. Don't forget the release notes!

Thanks!,
I apologizes for having publicly caused the trouble due to my failure.:-(
However, I firmly continue working. I want to straighten the preparation
soon. Then, surely.!

>
> BTW; use 'make distcheck' when you build the tarball. That will build
> it, and then test it to make sure it compiles OK.

Yea, Thanks!

Regards,
Hiroshi Saito


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at

http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

There's another issue with the psqlodbc tarball, which has been there
awhile but I only just realized what it is: you are shipping aclocal.m4,
which is a derived file, without providing the upstream files needed to
recreate it. Specifically, there's no sign of a source file for the
PGAC_xxx macros needed by configure.ac.

This makes life difficult for packagers who need to re-run aclocal
(in my case, because Red Hat ships a different automake version than
you guys are using). I believe it's also a violation of the LGPL.

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

Tom Lane wrote:
> There's another issue with the psqlodbc tarball, which has been there
> awhile but I only just realized what it is: you are shipping aclocal.m4,
> which is a derived file, without providing the upstream files needed to
> recreate it. Specifically, there's no sign of a source file for the
> PGAC_xxx macros needed by configure.ac.
>
> This makes life difficult for packagers who need to re-run aclocal
> (in my case, because Red Hat ships a different automake version than
> you guys are using). I believe it's also a violation of the LGPL.

Hmm, thats how Peter designed it for us so we didn't have to have our
own copies of all the PG macros iirc. I don't have enough autoconf foo
to know how best to fix it though. Peter?

Regards, Dave

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq

Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> This makes life difficult for packagers who need to re-run aclocal
>> (in my case, because Red Hat ships a different automake version than
>> you guys are using). I believe it's also a violation of the LGPL.

> Hmm, thats how Peter designed it for us so we didn't have to have our
> own copies of all the PG macros iirc. I don't have enough autoconf foo
> to know how best to fix it though. Peter?

Hm, so you're pulling those macros directly from the underlying Postgres
installation? I didn't think they got installed anywhere --- I could do
the same if they are, but not if running aclocal requires access to a
Postgres source tree.

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match

Tom Lane wrote:
> Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> This makes life difficult for packagers who need to re-run aclocal
>>> (in my case, because Red Hat ships a different automake version than
>>> you guys are using). I believe it's also a violation of the LGPL.
>
>> Hmm, thats how Peter designed it for us so we didn't have to have our
>> own copies of all the PG macros iirc. I don't have enough autoconf foo
>> to know how best to fix it though. Peter?
>
> Hm, so you're pulling those macros directly from the underlying Postgres
> installation? I didn't think they got installed anywhere --- I could do
> the same if they are, but not if running aclocal requires access to a
> Postgres source tree.

No, it's built in a pre-configured source tree under src/interfaces. See
http://cvs.pgfoundry.org/cgi-bin/cvs...n.html?rev=1.4
- the 'Building a distribution' section is the set of instructions that
Peter wrote.

Regards, Dave.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hm, so you're pulling those macros directly from the underlying Postgres
>> installation? I didn't think they got installed anywhere --- I could do
>> the same if they are, but not if running aclocal requires access to a
>> Postgres source tree.

> No, it's built in a pre-configured source tree under src/interfaces. See
> http://cvs.pgfoundry.org/cgi-bin/cvs...n.html?rev=1.4
> - the 'Building a distribution' section is the set of instructions that
> Peter wrote.

Well, this is exactly the problem: the psqlodbc distribution is missing
files needed to build from source, ie, the reference to $PGSRC/config
in the directions. Since $PGSRC/config is also not installed by
Postgres packages, this leaves RPM packagers unable to build psqlodbc
according to the rules. The whole thing seems like bad practice anyway,
since it's unclear which version of the Postgres sources needs to be
used to build any particular psqlodbc release.

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at

http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate