From: Frank van Vugt <ftm.van.vugt@foxi.nl>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>,
 Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: v15rc2(/v15rc1/v15b4) shadowbuild fails when using src from
 symlink
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2022 13:42:45 +0200
Message-ID: <3126410.5fSG56mABF@techfox>
In-Reply-To: <20221006165753.h34haafatwhwnjqj@alvherre.pgsql>
References: <20221006165753.h34haafatwhwnjqj@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/3126410.5fSG56mABF%40techfox>
Precedence: bulk

Hi Alvaro/Michael/Tom,

Op donderdag 6 oktober 2022 18:57:53 CEST schreef Alvaro Herrera:
> On 2022-Oct-06, Frank van Vugt wrote:
> > Just like v15rc1, the second rc fails to compile when using the source
> > from a symlink.
>=20
> Yeah, nobody has claimed to have fixed this, so this is not surprising.

Agreed and it's obviously not a 'big deal'.

Also there was a lot more going on during the commitfest etc, so I just wan=
ted=20
to 'repeat' the message until someone was able to find some 'spare time' to=
=20
reply ;)

> You didn't reply to Michael's reply to your previous report; any
> thoughts on that?

argh, it seems like I completely missed his initial reply (probably trusted=
=20
too much on the 'cc the original sender' ;) ). Sorry 'bout that.

@Michael
"why such an exotic way to build" -> well, 'a bit archa=EFc' maybe, just=20
something that came about when I was often building for various architectur=
es=20
using the same build source, but in no way this is something that 'needs to=
 be=20
this way' for me, so I'm happy to adapt ;)

> [AH] Maybe if you propose a fix, we can discuss it.

> [MP] Agreed, getting a supporting buildfarm animal set up would be
> an important step if we wanted to accept such a patch.

> [AH] maybe a more convenient way forward is <cut> tell Frank to use
> our Meson build instead.  (Not available until 16)

> [TL] +1, I think we're committed to spending future effort on
> the meson infrastructure not the autoconf infrastructure.

Tnx guys for all the background info, I couldn't agree more, fixing this in=
=20
the autoconf realm seems a moot point.

During v14/v15 I'll just handle this by building in a slightly different wa=
y,=20
as soon as the meson infrastructure shows up, we'll take if from there (if=
=20
needed at all).


=2D-=20

Best,


=46rank.