From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Subject: | Re: Still a few flaws in configure's default CFLAGS selection |
Date: | 2003-10-16 18:54:06 |
Message-ID: | 200310161854.h9GIs6e02690@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > The vote was whether -g should be used for a default compile. Of course
> > --enable-debug would continue using -g. Maybe we kept --enable-debug
> > for backward compatibility or to force -g if you modified CFLAGS?
>
> I can't see why we would have kept --enable-debug if we intended to make
> -g be default anyway. Backwards compatibility is not an issue, because
> configure simply ignores --enable switches it doesn't recognize (another
> questionable autoconf design decision, but I digress). And if you are
> setting CFLAGS for yourself, you are surely capable of adding -g to it
> if you want; why would you type seven times as much to accomplish the
> same thing?
The discussion mentions the problem with keeping --enable-debug:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2002-04/msg00281.php
I am not sure that Peter actually implemented it, but when I started
seeing -g flags in the compile, I assumed it had been done.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Stark | 2003-10-16 20:16:10 | Re: Some thoughts about i/o priorities and throttling vacuum |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-10-16 18:52:55 | Re: Still a few flaws in configure's default CFLAGS selection |