Re: Should we use make -k on the buildfarm?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Should we use make -k on the buildfarm?
Date: 2010-11-08 20:38:16
Message-ID: 29727.1289248696@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> On mn, 2010-11-08 at 15:01 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> First, the buildfarm doesn't build the docs. That's a deliberate
>> decision, based on the fact that not every member has the required
>> software installed. And second these targets only exist for 9.0 and/or
>> later.

> I'm aware of those issues. I'm just saying you could consolidate things
> along those lines in the long term.

Probably not: your proposal depends on having "make" available, which it
won't be for Windows builds. I doubt Andrew wishes to implement
make-equivalent logic in the buildfarm script.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2010-11-08 20:48:49 Re: Should we use make -k on the buildfarm?
Previous Message Michael Glaesemann 2010-11-08 20:37:50 Removing pgsql_tmp files