From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
cc: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>,
        pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: PL_stashcache, or, what's our minimum Perl version?
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>
Comments: In-reply-to Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
	message dated "Mon, 31 Jul 2017 14:49:26 -0400"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <9071.1501527316.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 14:55:16 -0400
Message-ID: <9072.1501527316@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

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