Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dbCk2-00085a-9q for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 21:24:14 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dbCk1-0001Yc-Ky for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 21:24:13 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dbCk0-0001XX-HQ for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 21:24:12 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dbCjw-0002F4-S2 for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 21:24:12 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v6SLO6qc004040; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 17:24:06 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Andrew Dunstan cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: PL_stashcache, or, what's our minimum Perl version? In-reply-to: References: <20540.1501210115@sss.pgh.pa.us> <24665.1501214288@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Andrew Dunstan message dated "Fri, 28 Jul 2017 15:01:11 -0400" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <4038.1501277046.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 17:24:06 -0400 Message-ID: <4039.1501277046@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org Andrew Dunstan writes: >> On 07/27/2017 11:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> I wonder if it'd be worth getting the buildfarm >>> to log the output of "perl -V" so we could get a clearer picture >>> of what's being tested. > Looks like this, bit it's rather tedious. I think I might back it out. I > guess I could also write it to a log file, if we really think we need it. > Yeah, that's awfully verbose :-(. I suspect most vendors wouldn't bother with enumerating quite so many patches. I fixed configure so that it will report what it saw in $Config{ccflags}; that may be sufficient. regards, tom lane --=20 Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers