From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Very confusing installcheck behavior with PGXS |
Date: | 2016-01-07 18:12:13 |
Message-ID: | 12117.1452190333@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> writes:
> If we want to keep input/ and output/ inside pg_regress then I think
> what needs to happen in a vpath build is to first create $vpath/sql and
> $vpath/expected, copy anything from $(uh... source?)/sql and /expected
> there, and then process /input and /output (and deal with any duplicate
> file references).
No, I don't think we want to physically copy anything we don't have to.
(Before the commit I mentioned upthread, we were actually doing it more
or less as you suggest, and it was messy.)
I'm not really concerned about the current behavior of putting transformed
input/output files into sql/ and expected/. Only experts are likely to
be creating files requiring transformation at all (and even the experts
prefer to avoid that, because they're a PITA). So I am not very worried
about duplication of file names between eg input/ and sql/. But I don't
like handling VPATH by introducing confusion between --inputdir and
--outputdir.
It does strike me though that some of your pain is self-inflicted: why
did you think it was a good idea to create both test/sql/ and sql/
subdirectories? What's the point of test/ at all? It's certainly not
part of the standard layout for a contrib module.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeff Janes | 2016-01-07 18:30:40 | Re: No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So! |
Previous Message | Jim Nasby | 2016-01-07 17:59:17 | Re: Very confusing installcheck behavior with PGXS |