Dear Tom, dear Peter, > By my count it adds about 2 megabytes to the installed footprint, which > perhaps is not so much now as it was at the time.
Ok. I agree. I'm investigating on how to do that, and the choice will be to committers. > A larger problem from my point of view is that the installation process > seems quite inefficient. "make install-all-headers" takes a full minute > on my devel machine, which is above my threshold of pain for something > that I often do more than once a day. As I'm into these files, I can say that one of the reason for that is that the shell scripts in the makefile looks inefficient, with nested for-loops and one-at-a-time config/install-sh forked-script copies for 350 header files, on the 971 files of a standard installation. I guess it a deliberate portability choice that only standard shell and file wildcards are used. I'm not sure there is a simple and *portable* performance fix on the installation. Some files are copied more that once: for instance, pg_config.h is copied both in include/ and include/server, and there are others examples file that. In fact, all files and directories under include/ but include/server seems also copied into include/server. It seems to be a 200KB and 28 files replication. Not really big deal, but not really clean either. If there is only one installation target which includes all header files, ISTM that the include/server subdirectory does not make much sense anymore? On the other hand, it might help packagers to have a clear list of the use of all headers files, in order that they can figure out where they belong to. Opinions? -- Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
