From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Required make version |
Date: | 2008-02-27 06:28:01 |
Message-ID: | 14868.1204093681@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> ... This was in response to your request
> So obviously, there are a few possible solutions. We just have to
> pick one we like best.
Check.
> We could actually query make whether it supports order-only prerequisites and
> only use the developer-optimized rules in that case. That would mean,
> however, that the optimized rules would only be used with GNU make 3.81 or
> higher. I read earlier that you use 3.79.1, so then you still wouldn't get
> the behavior you want.
Well, it's not that I'm unwilling to install something newer, but I
deliberately run a trailing-edge toolchain on this particular machine
as a sanity check on what we require to build. I don't think we should
increase our build tool requirements without a fairly good reason, and
my essentially-cosmetic request doesn't seem to me to be a good enough
reason.
Of the alternatives mentioned so far, suppressing the command echo
really seems the best to me ...
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Hiroshi Saito | 2008-02-27 07:13:56 | Re: pgsql: Don't build the win32 support files in the all target, only in |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-02-27 04:46:54 | Re: An idea for parallelizing COPY within one backend |