From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Euler Taveira <euler@timbira.com.br>
cc: YUriy Zhuravlev <u.zhuravlev@postgrespro.ru>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: WIP: About CMake v2
In-reply-to: <565714DB.3090806@timbira.com.br>
References: <4184974.kkvGJ5GoEX@dinodell> <2994177.9dns9R51cr@dinodell>
 <56568AB1.1000301@timbira.com.br> <1638284.A3YGmiYSRS@dinodell>
 <565714DB.3090806@timbira.com.br>
Comments: In-reply-to Euler Taveira <euler@timbira.com.br>
 message dated "Thu, 26 Nov 2015 11:19:07 -0300"
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 11:10:36 -0500
Message-ID: <26660.1448554236@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

Euler Taveira <euler@timbira.com.br> writes:
> On 26-11-2015 07:33, YUriy Zhuravlev wrote:
>> Maybe you are right. But by the time I finish my work I think 3.0 will become 
>> a standard. CMake is developing rapidly and soon will have version 3.4.1
>> And one more thing: a normal documentation came with 3.0. :)
>> But I try to check my code for 2.8.11, now I have 3.4.0 (latest for Gentoo).

> Have in mind that stable distros have a long cycle and are not released
> soon. If you are planning your cmake work for 9.6 or even 9.7, it is
> prudent to suport Red Hat 7 or Debian 8 because it will be a pain in the
> neck to install a new cmake version just to compile postgres.

Not working with the cmake version shipped in current distributions would
almost certainly cause us to reject this patch.  Adding a new build
dependency is bad enough; adding one that isn't easily available is a
show-stopper.  You'd better think in terms of what's provided with RHEL6,
not RHEL7, as the minimum baseline on the Red Hat side.  I'm not sure what
the oldest active LTS distribution is in the Debian world, but I'm pretty
sure it won't have cmake 3.

(FWIW, RHEL6 seems to be carrying 2.8.12 currently.)

			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