| From: | Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Joe Abbate <jma(at)freedomcircle(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 9.2rc1 build requirements |
| Date: | 2012-08-31 00:47:01 |
| Message-ID: | CAJKUy5iegQWLCcSABWSqiJV_5gCitEYHoB22MSEhAnk3AHX-1Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Joe Abbate <jma(at)freedomcircle(dot)com> wrote:
> On 30/08/12 17:36, Tom Lane wrote:
>> FWIW, that suggests that this version of jade is too old. I'm not sure
>> that jade per se (as opposed to the successor project openjade) can be
>> used to build our docs at all --- you should check whether this is
>> openjade, or really the original project.
>
> It was the old jade. After I installed openjade, as suggested by Alvaro
> and Jeff Janes, and re-ran ./configure the invocation line changed to
> use openjade.
>
so, now the question is: should we accept jade at all in configure? or
should we fail after not finding jade and report why?
--
Jaime Casanova www.2ndQuadrant.com
Professional PostgreSQL: Soporte 24x7 y capacitación
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jaime Casanova | 2012-08-31 00:48:08 | Re: 9.2rc1 build requirements |
| Previous Message | Jeff Janes | 2012-08-31 00:31:11 | Re: 9.2rc1 build requirements |