Re: Experimental patch: generating BKI revisited

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane escribi:
>> Yeah. Although the project policy is that we don't require Perl to
>> build on Unix, there was a bug in the makefiles that made it effectively
>> required, and nobody noticed for several years. I don't think it would
>> be a hard sell to change that policy if we got a significant benefit out
>> of it. (Depending on non-core Perl modules is a totally different thing
>> though.)

> Well, this is a pretty fortunate turn of events. I had two paragraphs
> in my original email that I edited out ("... so I'm not going to say
> more") on how to workaround the lack of Perl. If we're all OK now on
> requiring some basic Perl installation then all the better. I certainly
> have no trouble with it.

Although actually, we could still keep that policy if Perl is needed to
build .bki files --- we just have to build those files in distprep and
ship them as part of tarballs. It's already the case that you need Perl
to build from a CVS pull, it's only tarball users who don't need it.

regards, tom lane