Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 3:13 AM, Alvaro Herrera > <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > I mean, can't we just do the "push" unconditionally here? > > Why should we install unnecessary stuff? This complicates the > installation contents, the point being to have only shared libraries's > dll installed in bin/, and make things consistent with what MinGW > does. I was expecting that if no .dll or .lib file is expected to be installed, then the file would not be present in the first place. I just wanted to avoid what seems fragile coding. > > Surely if there are no "lib/dll" files in the subdirectory, nothing will > > happen, right? (I haven't actually tried.) > > No, it fails. And we should actually have a bin/lib that has been > correctly generated. Do you think this is a problem? Normally we > *should* fail IMO, meaning that the build process has broken what it > should have done. Makes sense. I have pushed your patch; we'll see what the buildfarm thinks of it. (Sadly, the number of MSVC members is rather small and they don't run often.) -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
