| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: failing to build preproc.c on solaris with sun studio |
| Date: | 2022-09-04 13:46:31 |
| Message-ID: | 442b85f1-8a69-1282-36b0-1bba2aca0d85@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2022-09-02 Fr 13:56, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
>> I also wonder if we shouldn't just make ecpg optional at some point. Or even
>> move it out of the tree.
> The reason it's in the tree is to ensure its grammar stays in sync
> with the core grammar, and perhaps more to the point, that it's
> possible to build its grammar at all. If it were at arm's length,
> we'd probably not have noticed the conflict over STRING in the JSON
> patches until unpleasantly far down the road (to mention just the
> most recent example). However, those aren't arguments against
> making it optional-to-build like the PLs are.
>
>
That seems reasonable. Note that the buildfarm client would then need an
extra build step.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Zhihong Yu | 2022-09-04 13:52:37 | Re: freeing LDAPMessage in CheckLDAPAuth |
| Previous Message | Ranier Vilela | 2022-09-04 13:08:01 | Re: Latest build fails |