From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | Priit Laes <plaes(at)plaes(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Output configuration status after ./configure run. |
Date: | 2010-02-10 19:27:57 |
Message-ID: | 603c8f071002101127m6ff1626fobe4704f8e6ac68df@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 2:16 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> Maybe you didn't type it, but it came from elsewhere? Maybe you're
> inheriting settings from some environment variable, or a file? Maybe
> you're eval'ing pg_config --configure?
Yeah, could be.
> The general idea seems sensible to me. I can't comment on the
> specifics.
I took a quick look at it. It's basically just a block of output at
the end of configure that reflects the values for a subset of the
configuration parameters (for example, just off the top of my head,
--enable-debug, --enable-casserts, --enable-depend, and --enable-nls
aren't there). It already won't fit in a 24x80 window, and if we
actually make it complete, it'll be considerably longer. While not
denying its possible usefulness to the OP, I'm not sure that in
general more people would find it useful than annoying. I might be
wrong, though.
...Robert
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Teodor Sigaev | 2010-02-10 19:32:26 | Re: [CFReview] Red-Black Tree |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2010-02-10 19:16:59 | Re: [PATCH] Output configuration status after ./configure run. |