From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: meson: Non-feature feature options |
Date: | 2023-03-01 15:52:18 |
Message-ID: | b695b531-eb98-87f1-45c8-13f2ed3973a8@enterprisedb.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 24.02.23 14:01, Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
> Thanks for the feedback. I updated the ssl patch and if you like
> changes, I can apply the same logic to uuid.
Maybe we can make some of the logic less nested. Right now there is
if sslopt != 'none'
if not ssl.found() and sslopt in ['auto', 'openssl']
I think at that point, ssl.found() is never true, so it can be removed.
And the two checks for sslopt are nearly redundant.
At the end of the block, there is
# At least one SSL library must be found, otherwise throw an error
if sslopt == 'auto' and auto_features.enabled()
error('SSL Library could not be found')
endif
endif
which also implies sslopt != 'none'. So I think the whole thing could be
if sslopt in ['auto', 'openssl']
...
endif
if sslopt == 'auto' and auto_features.enabled()
error('SSL Library could not be found')
endif
both at the top level.
Another issue, I think this is incorrect:
+ openssl_required ? error('openssl function @0@ is
required'.format(func)) : \
+ message('openssl function @0@ is
required'.format(func))
We don't want to issue a message like this when a non-required function
is missing.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2023-03-01 15:52:49 | Re: Add LZ4 compression in pg_dump |
Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2023-03-01 15:48:22 | Re: Non-superuser subscription owners |