Trond Eivind Glomsrød wrote: > Lamar Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Unfortunately RPM deems a dependency upon libpq.so.2.0 to not be > > fulfilled by libpq.so.2.1 (how _can_ it know? A client linked to 2.0 > > might fail if 2.1 were to be loaded under it (hypothetically)). > There usually are no such problems, and I'm not aware of any specific > to postgresql either. There have been reports to the pgsql-bugs list and to the PHP list about this very issue. -- Lamar Owen WGCR Internet Radio 1 Peter 4:11
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL... Peter Eisentraut
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL... Lamar Owen
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: l... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: l... Trond Eivind Glomsrød
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] 7.0 vs. 7.1 (wa... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: l... Lamar Owen
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] 7.0 vs. 7.1 (wa... Trond Eivind Glomsrød
- [HACKERS] Re:RPM dependencies (Was: 7.0... Lamar Owen
- [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest ve... Trond Eivind Glomsrød
- RE: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: lates... Matthew