Feedback-ID: ie0a040ee:Fastmail
Message-ID: <79255bdf-78e1-4dbd-a3d0-ad3f22612b33@eisentraut.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2026 15:13:36 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: Windows meson build
To: Vladlen Popolitov <v.popolitov@postgrespro.ru>,
 pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Cc: Kohei Harikae <harikae.kohei@fujitsu.com>
References: 
 <TYVPR01MB113306AB19264E89AD360A40EE4522@TYVPR01MB11330.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
 <TYVPR01MB113302864D12BF0AF9F12BE4EE4E32@TYVPR01MB11330.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
 <173944432278.159115.3197178459315468186.pgcf@coridan.postgresql.org>
 <9dc075558202f41a6663a311d93c8134@postgrespro.ru>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
In-Reply-To: <9dc075558202f41a6663a311d93c8134@postgrespro.ru>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/79255bdf-78e1-4dbd-a3d0-ad3f22612b33%40eisentraut.org>
Precedence: bulk

On 13.02.25 12:38, Vladlen Popolitov wrote:
> Vladlen Popolitov писал(а) 2025-02-13 17:58:
>> The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
>> make installcheck-world:  tested, failed
>> Implements feature:       tested, failed
>> Spec compliant:           tested, failed
>> Documentation:            tested, failed
> Hi!
> 
>   Previous email has text "failed". It is generated by "send review" 
> function,
> I do not know, how to change it (tried in other browsers).
> 
> Nothing failed in this patch.

This patch is pretty old but it was still hanging around as open in the 
commitfest app.

I realize that the way the PostgreSQL build process finds all the 
dependencies is pretty complicated right now.  With configure some of 
them are found the old way using CPPFLAGS/LDFLAGS, some via specific 
foo-config scripts, some via pkg-config, some via specific custom code. 
With meson, similarly, but the actual details are different in each 
case.  Maybe we should document all of this accurately, or maybe it 
would be unmaintainable.  In any case, I don't think your patch has 
enough coverage to make this better, it just describes some specific 
scenario that works for you, and it moves some text out of context where 
it doesn't make sense anymore.  Maybe this kind of information is better 
in a how-to document or blog post, and from there we could generalize 
the information and maybe feed it back into the documentation.