On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 11:26:17PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote: > Danek, > > sorry for the late reply: I've been busy with my day job lately ;-)
No problem. I've been having the same problems. :) > > The team integrating postgres asserted that there was too much work to > > do to make this change in the amount of time they had, and that they > > already had initial positive feedback from the postgres community that > > such a change would be welcome, and preferred to push the change that > > way. > > I'm quite astonished to hear that: I recalled that automake supports > pkglibdir (i.e. a package-specific subdir of libdir) for the purpose of > storing e.g. package-specific modules that don't belong into libdir > directly. Hm. Well, either they didn't know about that detail, or they neglected to tell us it'd be that easy. :) To be fair, though, I think most of their "it'd be too much work" complaints revolved around testing the results of the changes, which they essentially had no resources to do. But that's a whole 'nother ball of wax. > When I checked the postgresql sources, I found that automake was > not in use, but pkglibdir was accounted for nonetheless, so the only > necessary code change was a one-liner in config.patch, as can be seen in > the webrev at > > http://www.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/~ro/opensolaris/webrev/pg-dirs/webrev/ > > That change took me under 15 minutes. Right now, there's no > --with-pkglibdir or similar configure switch, but that could be easily > added since patching src/Makefile.global.in is obviously not the proper > approach. Cool. The change ought to be pushed to the postgres community first, and a bug filed against the Solaris postgres to incorporate that patch when it's available. I'm not sure what the proper bug category is for postgres at Sun, or I'd check to see if that much had already been done. > That change is even simpler to effect than the previous one, as can be seen > in the webrev, too: just change --localstatedir and --sharedstatedir. > > Apart from the changes proper, there are a couple of packaging changes > necesssary to reflect them, but they are simply search-and-replace. > > With those changes, I was able to successfully build both postgres and the > relevant packages. Excellent; another bug to be filed. (Both of these would probably need to be fast-tracked through the ARC as well.) I can't speak to the rest of the changes you're proposing, but I believe they're all worthwhile. I think your next step at this point is probably a message to request-sponsor. (Unless someone lurking is qualified to pick it up directly.) Thanks, Danek
