Re: Tarball builds in the new world order

Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> writes:
> On 26.04.24 21:24, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Concretely, I'm proposing the attached. Peter didn't like
>> PG_COMMIT_HASH, so I have PG_COMMIT_REFSPEC below, but I'm not
>> wedded to that if a better name is proposed.

> This seems ok to me, but note that we do have an equivalent
> implementation in meson. If we don't want to update that in a similar
> way, maybe we should disable it.

OK. After poking at that for awhile, it seemed like "default to
HEAD" fits into meson a lot better than "throw an error if the
variable isn't set", so I switched to doing it like that.
One reason is that AFAICT you can only set the variable during
"meson setup" not during "ninja". This won't matter to the
tarball build script, which does a one-off configuration run
anyway. But for manual use, a movable target like HEAD might be
more convenient given that behavior.

I tested this by building tarballs using the makefiles on a RHEL8
box, and using meson on my MacBook (with recent MacPorts tools).
I got bit-for-bit identical files, which I found rather impressive
given the gap between the platforms. Maybe this "reproducible builds"
wheeze will actually work.

I also changed the variable name to PG_GIT_REVISION per your
other suggestion.

regards, tom lane