From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: PL_stashcache, or, what's our minimum Perl version?
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 16:54:45 -0400
Message-ID: <18305.1501534485@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7fbd4508-23c5-f426-d374-6c72e20bbce9@2ndquadrant.com>
References: <20540.1501210115@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<16894.1501392088@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20170730154814.GA2636941@rfd.leadboat.com>
<22744.1501430710@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20170730163054.GA2630977@rfd.leadboat.com>
<25937.1501433410@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<c3ad3515-64e9-f5a1-1f39-d2cb646fcb96@2ndquadrant.com>
<9072.1501527316@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<90a92a7d-938e-507a-3bd7-ecd2b4004689@2ndquadrant.com>
<14432.1501529890@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<7fbd4508-23c5-f426-d374-6c72e20bbce9@2ndquadrant.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 7/31/17 15:38, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Really? That seems pretty broken, independently of how many variables
>> are affected. But the ones you'd be most likely to do that with are
>> using AC_PATH_PROG already, I think. Having lesser-used program variables
>> behave inconsistently doesn't seem like much of a win.
> Well, if we're fiddling around here, I would change them all to
> AC_CHECK_PROG if possible. Especially the PYTHON one annoys me all the
> time. CC is another one I set occasionally.
I will object really really strongly to that, as it is 180 degrees from
where I think we need to go, and will make things a lot worse than before
on the documentation aspect that I was concerned about to begin with.
If we need to fix things so that AC_PATH_PROG will honor a non-path
input value, then let's do that. But let's not make the build system
shakier/less reproducible than it is already.
I suggest that we could inject logic like this:
if VARIABLE-is-set-and-value-isn't-already-absolute; then
VARIABLE=`which $VARIABLE 2>/dev/null`
fi
in front of the existing logic for AC_PATH_PROG(VARIABLE,...).
Maybe "which" isn't the best tool for the job, not sure.
Another idea, which would probably require replacing _AC_PATH_PROG
rather than just putting a wrapper around it, would be to let it
perform its normal path walk but using the given word instead of
$ac_word.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com, noah@leadboat.com, andrew@dunslane.net
Subject: Re: PL_stashcache, or, what's our minimum Perl version?
In-Reply-To: <18305.1501534485@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox