Re: PL_stashcache, or, what's our minimum Perl version?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: PL_stashcache, or, what's our minimum Perl version?
Date: 2017-07-30 16:05:10
Message-ID: 22744.1501430710@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> writes:
> On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 01:21:28AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think it'd be a good idea to insist that "prove" be in
>> the same directory we found "perl" in.

> Nah; on my machines, I use /usr/bin/perl and ~/sw/cpan/bin/prove. The latter
> is built against the former, so there's no particular hazard.

Well, OK, but I'd still like to tweak configure so that it records
an absolute path for prove rather than just setting PROVE=prove.
That way you'd at least be able to tell from the configure log
whether you are possibly at risk.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2017-07-30 16:22:38 Re: PL_stashcache, or, what's our minimum Perl version?
Previous Message Noah Misch 2017-07-30 15:48:14 Re: PL_stashcache, or, what's our minimum Perl version?