On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 5:29 PM Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > On 2021-03-19 22:19:49 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote: > > Yeah. And why does it even require pkg-config, unlike any other library > > that I'm aware of? > > IMO it's fine to require pkg-config to simplify the configure > code. Especially for new optional features. Adding multiple alternative > ways to discover libraries for something like this makes configure > slower, without a comensurate benefit.
So, would anyone like to propose a patch to revise the logic in a way that they like better? Here's one from me that tries to make the handling of the LZ4 stuff more like what we already do for zlib, but I'm not sure if it's correct, or if it's what everyone wants. Thoughts? -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
redo-lz4-configuration.patch
Description: Binary data
