Re: Tarball builds in the new world order

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Tarball builds in the new world order
Date: 2024-04-24 15:21:13
Message-ID: 3709288.1713972073@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 6:06 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Now, if we just do it exactly like that
>> then trying to "make dist" without setting PG_COMMIT_HASH will
>> fail, since "git archive" has no default for its <tree-ish>
>> argument. I can't quite decide if that's a good thing, or if we
>> should hack the makefile a little further to allow PG_COMMIT_HASH
>> to default to HEAD.

> Just having it fail seems harsh. What if we had plain "make dist" at least
> output a friendly hint about "please specify a hash"? That seems better
> than an implicit HEAD default, as they can manually set it to HEAD
> themselves per the hint.

Yeah, it would be easy to do something like

ifneq ($(PG_COMMIT_HASH),)
$(GIT) ...
else
@echo "Please specify PG_COMMIT_HASH." && exit 1
endif

I'm just debating whether that's better than inserting a default
value.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2024-04-24 16:07:03 Re: Introduce new multi insert Table AM and improve performance of various SQL commands with it for Heap AM
Previous Message Tom Lane 2024-04-24 15:03:30 Re: Tarball builds in the new world order