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
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 |