Re: Small TAP improvements

On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 12:20:56PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>> The second changes the new GUCs TAP test to check against the installed
>> postgresql.conf.sample rather than the one in the original source
>> location. There are probably arguments both ways, but if we ever decided
>> to postprocess the file before installation, this would do the right thing.
>
> Seems like a good idea, especially since it also makes the test code
> shorter and more robust(-looking).

It seems to me that you did not look at the git history very closely.
The first version of 003_check_guc.pl did exactly what 0002 is
proposing to do, see b0a55f4. That's also why config_data() has been
introduced in the first place. This original logic has been reverted
once shortly after, as of 52377bb, per a complain by Christoph Berg
because this broke some of the assumptions the custom patches of
Debian relied on:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/YgYw25OXV5men8Fj@msg.df7cb.de

And it was also pointed out that we'd better use the version in the
source tree rather than a logic that depends on finding the path from
the output of pg_config with an installation tree assumed to exist
(there should be one for installcheck anyway), as of:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2023925.1644591595@sss.pgh.pa.us

If the change of 0002 is applied, we will just loop back to the
original issue with Debian. So I am adding Christoph in CC, as he has
also mentioned that the patch applied to PG for Debian that
manipulates the installation paths has been removed, but I may be
wrong in assuming that it is the case.
--
Michael