On 11/11/2015 12:34 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> writes:
On 11/2/15 4:07 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
I wonder how much we need that script at all though. If, say, configure
doesn't find bison, what's so wrong with just defining BISON=bison and
letting the usual shell "bison: command not found" error leak through?
I agree. Something like the attached patch.
I was thinking more of removing the "missing" script and associated logic
entirely, rather than making PGXS a special case. I think we should do
our best to minimize differences between behaviors in core builds and
PGXS builds, if only because we don't test the latter very much and
might not notice problems there.
At least two buildfarm members (crake and sitella) build FDWs using
PGXS. Of course, they aren't likely to uncover problems with missing
perl/bison/flex - especially perl ;-) But I don't want people to get the
idea we don't test PGXS regularly, because we do.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
