Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1tryr2-00Ct2e-74 for pgsql-pkg-yum@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2025 12:37:04 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1tryr0-00FQiC-Vf for pgsql-pkg-yum@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2025 12:37:02 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1tryr0-00FQhk-Kr for pgsql-pkg-yum@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2025 12:37:02 +0000 Received: from share.ioda.net ([2001:1620:c89:0:10da:2947:4500:dada]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1tryqy-002E0d-11 for pgsql-pkg-yum@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2025 12:37:01 +0000 Received: from qt-kt.labaroche.ioda.net (x-wing.labaroche.ioda.net [IPv6:2001:1620:c89:0:e6ee:3ea7:da20:356d]) by share.ioda.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0D188CC9530; Tue, 11 Mar 2025 12:36:58 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ioda-net.ch; s=mail; t=1741696618; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=TvSF1D+K0eh+zx1klFDy4THN4oXviY6tymEgRT/PpGE=; b=mEwwTSg0vet9JeuJffRne7IDr38oGBcA+rLTJT4IwnjR8c9/zFbTK6+1h1i7lou6Tb/Gkj 73JD2E/Fp2r3ojersSPAWsDZvq37ctm619ikgB1Mu3bItrxTeQcfG9PzR1dINpYmiEhhGE i68+cXEtE9GV3JL+s+4dPt935dCX1Wk= From: Bruno Friedmann To: =?UTF-8?B?w4FsdmFybw==?= Herrera , Laurenz Albe Cc: pgsql-pkg-yum@lists.postgresql.org, Devrim =?UTF-8?B?R8O8bmTDvHo=?= Subject: Re: BUG #18833: libpq.so doesn't contain declared symbol in rpm --provides Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 13:36:53 +0100 Message-ID: <12447006.8bMQJbFj6T@x-wing> Organization: Ioda-Net =?UTF-8?B?U8Ogcmw=?= In-Reply-To: <56f3cdf2fd2dee3553c08473438377e8a9f881e3.camel@cybertec.at> References: <202503110911.3ch36e6l4w5n@alvherre.pgsql> <1809308.9hSmTKtgW7@x-wing> <56f3cdf2fd2dee3553c08473438377e8a9f881e3.camel@cybertec.at> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart12186012.hzESeGDPOM"; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: -4.47 List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk --nextPart12186012.hzESeGDPOM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="nextPart16915991.tgchFWduMW"; protected-headers="v1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit From: Bruno Friedmann Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 13:36:53 +0100 Message-ID: <12447006.8bMQJbFj6T@x-wing> Organization: Ioda-Net =?UTF-8?B?U8Ogcmw=?= MIME-Version: 1.0 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --nextPart16915991.tgchFWduMW Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" On mardi, 11 mars 2025 12.03:08 h heure normale d=E2=80=99Europe centrale L= aurenz Albe=20 wrote: > On Tue, 2025-03-11 at 11:58 +0100, Bruno Friedmann wrote: > > On mardi, 11 mars 2025 10.11:27 h heure normale d=E2=80=99Europe centra= le =C3=81lvaro=20 Herrera wrote: > > > On 2025-Mar-11, Bruno Friedmann wrote: > > > > We (Bareos dev's team) build our software on what's distributed by = the > > > > OS > > > > editor. which means for RHEL9 libpq5-devel 13.20 (rhel) > > > >=20 > > > > From time to time people want (for good reasons :-) ) use pgdg > > > > binaries, > > > >=20 > > > > if you go that way libpq from pgdg is installed and as the rpm > > > > provides > > > > all RH symbol you will get only this. > > >=20 > > > Wouldn't this be solved if you built your software using the PGDG > > > packages instead? That should be compatible with both the PGDG _and_ > > > the RH packages. > >=20 > > And why we would do that ? pgdg is an additional third repository. > > We have to build binaries that will work out of the box from the softwa= re > > vendor with restricted possibility. which is what we do. >=20 > But that is exactly the idea. Build against the PGDG packages, then > the binaries should work out of the box with the Redhat packages as well. >=20 > Are you trying to make things work or is this a matter of principle? >=20 > Yours, > Laurenz Albe Ha ha that's just the reverse that should happen. PGDG is claiming 100% ABI compatibility, which has been proved here that's = not=20 the case and all this bug is about this. If you don't care, me neither, we detected that, we reported it, you decide. As an editor POV we certainly don't want to build from 3rd parties, except= =20 when customer are paying for that specific. So for us the situation is clear, before the symbol version was introduced = in=20 =46edora/Rhel our customer were able to use transparently as the software d= idn't=20 complain pgdg repository at their convenience. Now that system libraries are build with symbol version, and our lib depend= on=20 those to be present due the build itself, the pgdg might be usable but with= out=20 any warranties. And we advertise people to better stick to module proposed = by=20 the OS editors. I'm not yet sure what kind of impact those symbol check will have for any=20 software build against system libs in Fedora/Redhat and then used with pgdg= =20 lib. I guess the same warning will be emitted each time. Regards. =2D-=20 Bruno Friedmann Ioda-Net S=C3=A0rl www.ioda-net.ch expertise en open-source GPG KEY: E4720D8715B696B4=20 irc: tigerfoot Computing freedom with openSUSE Tumbleweed - 20250307 --nextPart16915991.tgchFWduMW Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"

On mardi, 11 mars 2025 12.03:08 h heure normale d=E2=80=99Europe central= e Laurenz Albe wrote:

>= ; On Tue, 2025-03-11 at 11:58 +0100, Bruno Friedmann wrote:

>= ; > On mardi, 11 mars 2025 10.11:27 h heure normale d=E2=80=99Europe cen= trale =C3=81lvaro Herrera wrote:

>= ; > > On 2025-Mar-11, Bruno Friedmann wrote:

>= ; > > > We (Bareos dev's team) build our software on what's distri= buted by the

>= ; > > > OS

>= ; > > > editor. which means for RHEL9 libpq5-devel 13.20 (rhel)

>= ; > > >

>= ; > > > From time to time people want (for good reasons :-) ) use = pgdg

>= ; > > > binaries,

>= ; > > >

>= ; > > > if you go that way libpq from pgdg is installed and as the= rpm

>= ; > > > provides

>= ; > > > all RH symbol you will get only this.

>= ; > >

>= ; > > Wouldn't this be solved if you built your software using the PG= DG

>= ; > > packages instead?=C2=A0 That should be compatible with both the= PGDG _and_

>= ; > > the RH packages.

>= ; >

>= ; > And why we would do that ? pgdg is an additional third repository.

>= ; > We have to build binaries that will work out of the box from the sof= tware

>= ; > vendor with restricted possibility. which is what we do.

>= ;

>= ; But that is exactly the idea.  Build against the PGDG packages, then=

>= ; the binaries should work out of the box with the Redhat packages as well.=

>= ;

>= ; Are you trying to make things work or is this a matter of principle?

>= ;

>= ; Yours,

>= ; Laurenz Albe


Ha ha that's just the reverse that should happen.


PGDG is claiming 100% ABI compatibility, which has been proved here that= 's not the case and all this bug is about this.


If you don't care, me neither, we detected that, we reported it, you dec= ide.


As an editor POV we certainly don't want to build from 3rd parties, exce= pt when customer are paying for that specific.


So for us the situation is clear, before the symbol version was introduc= ed in Fedora/Rhel our customer were able to use transparently as the softwa= re didn't complain pgdg repository at their convenience.


Now that system libraries are build with symbol version, and our lib dep= end on those to be present due the build itself, the pgdg might be usable b= ut without any warranties. And we advertise people to better stick to modul= e proposed by the OS editors.


I'm not yet sure what kind of impact those symbol check will have for an= y software build against system libs in Fedora/Redhat and then used with pg= dg lib. I guess the same warning will be emitted each time.


Regards.


--

Bru= no Friedmann

&nb= sp;Ioda-Net S=C3=A0rl www.ioda-net.ch

&nb= sp;  expertise en open-source


 GPG KEY: E4720D8715B696B4

&nb= sp;irc: tigerfoot

Com= puting freedom with openSUSE Tumbleweed - 20250307


--nextPart16915991.tgchFWduMW-- --nextPart12186012.hzESeGDPOM Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEIdujCRSnFsP4GTOJ5HINhxW2lrQFAmfQLmUACgkQ5HINhxW2 lrRTOhAAkUJ7i+nbXsvA7RMKD20QyTBbwthjwC8fSpIxpnH6aRbvV2dGVKxTfBBa 0ZVqCLUkAucOD4uNjohNdmTUiA8xgsj+GYKqTa1iUtOkJWvEuYqcUgZ/yibu8SIa MmbucBVRqRc6HnTZQa73lI4jZ4kMd38QqDwzfkGBb2sGpJAt2ihbQx6kkpc3KD/B 6JngHzTecbC2swPnpw4rcDD45fkO8nKkQe3E4P5jk6B4vBk6IJummssJLdhjtORB akL55WQplxcWs2wg/jYDo8SBaW3XU+lS4WLMolriHJObi/Jck8H2Lo69YgAWGJ8n O4u858EPiHdSehYoXIz45t6wpGQeGQJbS5avh6AEHq08aeBGVoTu1c97AN3DlZqf yexb5XAzwZntx+TNxr+BHAdLs+JSyFGWG+xq2lMQMbmHoTVdufamn8i6jv7Gxs8O m9urO/QaQvHNpmHtoPf7//xs5Q4LD7PHTRlnfMU2mm3bRNF8pY1omWheniQe4wlT qmzTHxFaI9onnX0HwSjWDcza3yVgsEj6qdrfUoa1dT8+rv9RAOAPNaWR2Pf2qYb+ aSCUd+DYEHDYfbwjxtpGCKCKClec4eIQOT67d/5lIwelKi87198uJFEWdEYBCPkF dE0tofETuP+2PkapNYfIQuhVppPQ0ZWmmWxGhiLsNWysRN/A2sw= =YyzK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart12186012.hzESeGDPOM--