On 11/3/14 3:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> writes: >> On 11/2/14 11:36 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Committed patch looks good, but should we also add the stanza we discussed >>> in Makefile.global.in concerning defining $(prove) in terms of "missing" >>> if we didn't find it? I think the behavior of HEAD when you ask for >>> --enable-tap-tests but don't have "prove" might be less than ideal. > >> configure will now fail when "prove" is not found. > > If there's a commit that goes with this statement, you neglected to push it...
Are you not seeing this in configure.in: # # Check for test tools # if test "$enable_tap_tests" = yes; then AC_CHECK_PROGS(PROVE, prove) if test -z "$PROVE"; then AC_MSG_ERROR([prove not found]) fi if test -z "$PERL"; then AC_MSG_ERROR([Perl not found]) fi fi -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers