From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: make check in contrib |
Date: | 2011-04-25 17:43:39 |
Message-ID: | 1303753419.5006.36.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On mån, 2011-04-25 at 13:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > On mån, 2011-04-25 at 11:22 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> The proposed patch is to fix it, not remove it. Surely that's more
> >> useful than a no-op target.
>
> > The proposed patch will support make check for contrib modules, but not
> > for external users of pgxs.
>
> So what will happen if an external user tries it? What happens now?
Now:
$ make check
'make check' is not supported.
Do 'make install', then 'make installcheck' instead.
make: *** [check] Error 1
If we removed that, then it would be:
make: Nothing to be done for `check'.
[exit 0]
Hmm, I'm slightly surprised by the latter behavior, but it's the case
that since "check" is a global phony target, if you don't provide
commands for it, it will just do nothing and succeed.
Since some people didn't like removing the hint about "installcheck",
I'd suggest just removing the "exit 1", which should then be pretty
consistent overall.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-04-25 17:45:10 | Re: Foreign table permissions and cloning |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-04-25 17:38:15 | Re: Unfriendly handling of pg_hba SSL options with SSL off |