| From: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: failing to build preproc.c on solaris with sun studio |
| Date: | 2022-09-04 15:06:14 |
| Message-ID: | 20220904150614.GA1114263@rfd.leadboat.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Sep 04, 2022 at 10:55:43AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> There'd need to be a separate discussion around how much to
> encourage buildfarm owners to add --with-ecpg to their
> configurations. One thing that would make that easier is
> adding --with-ecpg as a no-op option to the back branches,
> so that if you do want it on it doesn't have to be done
> with a branch-specific test.
That would not make it easier. "configure" doesn't fail when given unknown
options, so there's already no need for a branch-specific test. For example,
topminnow has no problem passing --with-llvm on branches lacking that option:
https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl?nm=topminnow&dt=2022-08-27%2005%3A57%3A45&stg=configure
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2022-09-04 17:40:14 | Re: TRAP: FailedAssertion("prev_first_lsn < cur_txn->first_lsn", File: "reorderbuffer.c", Line: 927, PID: 568639) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2022-09-04 14:55:43 | Re: failing to build preproc.c on solaris with sun studio |