Re: [HACKERS] Broken handling of lwlocknames.h

2016-07-02 Thread Christoph Berg
Re: Tom Lane 2016-07-01 <26357.1467400...@sss.pgh.pa.us> > I made some mostly-cosmetic changes to this and pushed it. I confirm that Debian's out-of-tree python3 build works now when invoked directly in the relevant plpython/hstore_plpython subdirectories. Thanks! Christoph -- Sent via

Re: [HACKERS] Broken handling of lwlocknames.h

2016-07-01 Thread Michael Paquier
On Sat, Jul 2, 2016 at 4:13 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Michael Paquier writes: >> Yes that would be indeed cleaner this way. I have poked a bit at that >> and finished with the attached that defines some rules to generate all >> the files needed. > > I

Re: [HACKERS] Broken handling of lwlocknames.h

2016-07-01 Thread Tom Lane
Michael Paquier writes: > Yes that would be indeed cleaner this way. I have poked a bit at that > and finished with the attached that defines some rules to generate all > the files needed. I made some mostly-cosmetic changes to this and pushed it. One thing to note is

Re: [HACKERS] Broken handling of lwlocknames.h

2016-07-01 Thread Tom Lane
Michael Paquier writes: > Yes that would be indeed cleaner this way. I have poked a bit at that > and finished with the attached that defines some rules to generate all > the files needed. But actually it does not seem to be enough, for > example on OSX this would fail

Re: [HACKERS] Broken handling of lwlocknames.h

2016-07-01 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 10:29 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> Since Tom proposed the approach which Michael's patch takes, I'm >> hoping he will review and commit this. If it is left to me to fix it, >> I may just adopt a minimal fix. > >

Re: [HACKERS] Broken handling of lwlocknames.h

2016-07-01 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > Since Tom proposed the approach which Michael's patch takes, I'm > hoping he will review and commit this. If it is left to me to fix it, > I may just adopt a minimal fix. I'll take a look at it. regards, tom lane -- Sent

Re: [HACKERS] Broken handling of lwlocknames.h

2016-07-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 12:09 AM, Noah Misch wrote: > [Action required within 72 hours. This is a generic notification.] > > The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 9.6 open item. Robert, > since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this

Re: [HACKERS] Broken handling of lwlocknames.h

2016-06-30 Thread Noah Misch
On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 12:26:00PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 3:22 AM, Christoph Berg wrote: > > Re: Tom Lane 2016-06-27 <31398.1467036...@sss.pgh.pa.us> > >> Bjorn Munch reported off-list that this sequence: > >> > >> unpack tarball, cd into it > >>

Re: [HACKERS] Broken handling of lwlocknames.h

2016-06-27 Thread Michael Paquier
On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 3:22 AM, Christoph Berg wrote: > Re: Tom Lane 2016-06-27 <31398.1467036...@sss.pgh.pa.us> >> Bjorn Munch reported off-list that this sequence: >> >> unpack tarball, cd into it >> ./configure ... >> cd src/test/regress >> make >> >> no longer works in

Re: [HACKERS] Broken handling of lwlocknames.h

2016-06-27 Thread Christoph Berg
Re: Tom Lane 2016-06-27 <31398.1467036...@sss.pgh.pa.us> > Bjorn Munch reported off-list that this sequence: > > unpack tarball, cd into it > ./configure ... > cd src/test/regress > make > > no longer works in 9.6beta2, where it did work in previous releases. > I have confirmed both statements.