| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
| Cc: | Vincas Dargis <vindrg(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Subject: | Re: Issues cross-compiling libpq 14.x to MacOS armv8 |
| Date: | 2021-11-30 22:08:10 |
| Message-ID: | 1650889.1638310090@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> writes:
> I noticed that we test without the x"foo" = x"yes" construction for zic (line
> 1135), should we change that while at it and be consistent for all
> $cross_compiling uses?
Probably. $cross_compiling should theoretically always be set, but
there's no harm in being bulletproof.
I had thought I could crank up a cross-compile test painlessly, but
at least on my available systems it doesn't seem to be painless :-(.
So I'm just going to push the change without having really tested
that end of it. I wonder if it is at all feasible to maintain a
cross-compiling buildfarm member ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2021-11-30 22:53:22 | Re: How to reveal the codes of functions properly? |
| Previous Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2021-11-30 21:43:12 | Re: Issues cross-compiling libpq 14.x to MacOS armv8 |