Re: OS X library path issues for libpq (ver 8.3)

On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 9:14 PM, Darren Weber
<darren.weber.lists@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yeah, I also found that fink conflicts with macports.  I do like the
> idea of using the Debian repository and package management system.
> For some reason, which escapes me now, I went with macports (maybe it
> was just that macports gave me an emacs.app - poor reason actually).
> Yet another "learning" curve for OSX.  All this confusion makes me
> appreciate the beauty of Debian systems (eg, Ubuntu), with regard to
> package management.  I hope all this mucking around with OSX is going
> to pay-off sooner or later.

It will. My advice, is to pick one packaging system for your
build-from-source addons, and stick with it. I prefer MacPorts,
Benjamin is a Fink man.

> I guess the best suggestion (maybe the best solution) in this thread
> to date is to hack that symlink and hope the build system (and
> run-time links) will work everything out from there.  Using the binary
> installer is easier and provides more GUI apps than doing the source
> build.  I've done a quick, standard source build and install into
> /usr/local/pgsql/, can this co-exist with the binary installation into
> /Library/PostgreSQL/[version]?

Yes. I regularly have half a dozen or more installs of PostgreSQL and
Postgres Plus (EnterpriseDB's version of PostgreSQL) on the same box -
including source and installer builds.

> FYI, just to illustrate some of the confusion I can see.  For
> starters, we need gmake.  Well:

Use make from XCode. It is gmake.

>
> OK, but it's curious that I'm running OS X (10.5; Darwin 9.4.0) on a
> mac pro with dual quad-core zeons and the make program was built for
> Darwin 9.0 on a powerpc!  (Looking to the heavens, I wonder how the
> hell can that work?)  It does work, but maybe I should build it to get
> the architecture right (maybe everything should be built from the
> ground up!), so:

Use the file command to check what type of binary it is. If it really
is a PPC binary, then it'll be running under Rosetta
(http://www.apple.com/rosetta/). Otherwise, it's probably a universal
binary which contains PPC and Intel executables in the same file.

> A bit more intrigue; I'm reading the options for building postgreSQL
> 8.3.3 and I check the system for libperl and libpython, ie:
>
...
>
> Whoa, talk about a real supermarket full of the "same" libraries.  I
> know that every-man and his dog has their own opinion on the "pure"
> installation system (maybe it's a bit like belief in one or many
> gods?).  Anyhow, I have to figure out what the default search path is
> for the linker (ie, how to avoid total paranoia about configuring
> builds).

You'll almost always use the stuff under
/Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.5.sdk, which is the Leopard SDK. Substitute
in /opt if you need non-standard versions of anything, or additional
libraries from MacPorts (or Fink). You've also got the Tiger SDK and
at least some of the iphone SDK there.

> Looks like I've got my work cut out for me before I even begin to
> develop anything.

It's really not that difficult - unless you need universal binaries,
or want to target older versions of OSX, you won't normally see
anything different from Linux for example.

--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com