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 14:55:16 -0400
Message-ID: <9072.1501527316@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c3ad3515-64e9-f5a1-1f39-d2cb646fcb96@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>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 7/30/17 12:50, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The reason it does that seems to be that we use AC_CHECK_PROGS
>> rather than AC_PATH_PROGS for locating "prove". I can see no
>> particular consistency to the decisions made in configure.in
>> about which to use:
> We use the "PATH" variants when we need a fully qualified name. For
> example, at some point or another, we needed to substitute a fully
> qualified perl binary name into the headers of scripts.
> If there is no such requirement, then we should use the non-PATH variants.
Why? That risks failures of various sorts, and you have not stated
any actual benefit of it.
In cases where people do things like sticking non-default Perl builds
into nonstandard places, failing to record the absolute path to the
program configure saw is both a documentation fail and a clear hazard
to build reproducibility. I think that "you can change your PATH and
get a different Perl version without reconfiguring" is an anti-feature,
because it poses a very high risk of not actually working.
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: <9072.1501527316@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