Re: MacOS: xsltproc fails with "warning: failed to load external entity"

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Subject: Re: MacOS: xsltproc fails with "warning: failed to load external entity"
Date: 2023-02-06 01:25:34
Message-ID: 2563864.1675646734@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> I did survey available meson versions, and chose what features to
> use. But not really ninja, since I didn't know about this specific issue
> and other than this the ninja version differences were handled by meson.

> As all the issues are related to more precise dependencies, I somehwat
> wonder if it'd be good enough to use less accurate dependencies with
> 1.8.2. But I don't like it.

Nah, I don't like that either. I did a crude survey of ninja's version
history by seeing which version is in each recent Fedora release:

f20/ninja-build.spec:Version: 1.4.0
f21/ninja-build.spec:Version: 1.5.1
f22/ninja-build.spec:Version: 1.5.3
f23/ninja-build.spec:Version: 1.7.1
f24/ninja-build.spec:Version: 1.7.2
f25/ninja-build.spec:Version: 1.8.2
f26/ninja-build.spec:Version: 1.8.2
f27/ninja-build.spec:Version: 1.8.2
f28/ninja-build.spec:Version: 1.8.2
f29/ninja-build.spec:Version: 1.8.2
f30/ninja-build.spec:Version: 1.9.0
f31/ninja-build.spec:Version: 1.10.1
f32/ninja-build.spec:Version: 1.10.1
f33/ninja-build.spec:Version: 1.10.2
f34/ninja-build.spec:Version: 1.10.2
f35/ninja-build.spec:Version: 1.10.2
f36/ninja-build.spec:Version: 1.10.2
f37/ninja-build.spec:Version: 1.10.2
rawhide/ninja-build.spec:Version: 1.11.1

Remembering that Fedora has a six-month release cycle, this shows that
1.8.2 was around for awhile but 1.9.x was a real flash-in-the-pan.
We can probably get away with saying that you need 1.10 or newer.
That's already three-plus years old.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jonathan S. Katz 2023-02-06 01:46:15 Re: First draft of back-branch release notes is done
Previous Message Peter Smith 2023-02-06 01:16:58 Re: Support logical replication of DDLs