From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | Robert Hentosh <hentosh(at)io(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Build fails for pl/tcl on OpenBSD |
Date: | 2001-05-06 00:48:51 |
Message-ID: | 21059.989110131@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
>> better find the appropriate version of tclsh first. It would appear
>> from looking at configure that the --with-tclconfig option is fairly
>> useless, since if you don't set it the correct value is extracted by
>> asking tclsh. You'd only need to specify it if your Tcl setup is not
>> internally consistent.
> The idea might have been that you could select which one of several
> installed Tcl version to use. E.g., if you have a cutting edge
> experimental build somewhere you could use
> --with-tclconfig=$HOME/tcl-install/lib.
Right, but AFAICT it's sufficient (and perhaps also necessary) to make
sure that your cutting-edge Tcl is first in your PATH. If you do
PATH=$HOME/tcl-install/bin:$PATH configure ...
then the same result is achieved by asking tclsh where to search for
tclConfig.sh. I am not sure whether tclsh is used for anything else
during the build; if it isn't then setting PATH isn't essential.
(In the perl case it *is* essential to set PATH...)
> Anyway, the problem here seems to be that the tclConfig.sh file does not
> provide a variable that gives a hint where to look for include files.
'Twould be nicer if it did that, all right.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Hentosh | 2001-05-06 02:24:18 | Re: Build fails for pl/tcl on OpenBSD |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2001-05-05 21:12:17 | Re: Build fails for pl/tcl on OpenBSD |