On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 02:29:08PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 11:17:29PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> cuckoo [7.3, 7.2]: --enable-nls without OS support > >> > >> This looks like pilot error; but the later branches don't fail on this > >> machine, so did we change something in this area? > > > Should I just stop using nls on 7.2 and 7.3 or does someone want to poke > > around with this further? > > I don't intend to look at it; but perhaps someone who cares more about > the NLS code will ...
Then I guess the question is... is it more valuable to have a working buildfarm environment for 7.2 and 7.3, or is the obnoxious failure better to spur someone into looking at it? :) Should this maybe be made a TODO and I'll adjust my config until someone tackles the TODO? Also, what do people think about having the buildfarm track different compile/build options on each environment? ISTM there's value in being able to change-up config options to make sure that different combinations work. My thought is having the buildfarm configured so that it knows what options on a machine should work (based on external dependancies) and then the script can cycle through different configs. Of course this means the server would have to do a better job of tracking per-config-setting info... -- Jim C. Nasby, Database Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828 Windows: "Where do you want to go today?" Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?" FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?" ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings