| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Upgrading our minimum required flex version for 8.5 |
| Date: | 2009-07-23 14:29:06 |
| Message-ID: | 16042.1248359346@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> Much as I dislike it, we may need to revisit the idea about putting
>> the flex output files in CVS...
> Why? This only affects developers building from a CVS pull. You don't
> need any flex at all to build from a tarball. If developers can't
> install flex on a *nix box they need to get out of the business.
I wonder if it would be helpful to have a buildfarm option whereby
it would fetch the latest nightly-snapshot tarball and use that instead
of a CVS pull. This would have the dual advantage of actually testing
builds from tarballs and requiring less stuff on the buildfarm machine.
It wouldn't be useful for more-than-once-a-day builds, but a lot of
the machines only build that often anyhow.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2009-07-23 14:36:38 | Re: Upgrading our minimum required flex version for 8.5 |
| Previous Message | Boszormenyi Zoltan | 2009-07-23 12:56:55 | Re: Split-up ECPG patches |