From: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: rc tarball built with older flex version? |
Date: | 2009-06-21 21:17:06 |
Message-ID: | 20090621181540.Q56412@hub.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 18 Jun 2009, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
>> I noticed that the rc1 tarball includes scanner files that are built with an
>> older flex version that generates warnings with our default compilation flags.
>> Since I have been running with -Werror by default for a great while now, this
>> caught my attention while testing the tarball. Are we tracking this or are we
>> just using whatever was installed on the host that created the snapshot?
>
> It's whatever is installed on svr1, but we don't change that often,
> and I'm particularly not inclined to change it post-RC. We don't
> recommend that people use -Werror to build, so I think we should just
> write this off as "not a bug".
I'm a bit confused here though ... I haven't changed flex on that VPS
recently ... in fact, its dated Sep 15, 2007 ... so the builds have been
using the same flex for a long while now ...
Peter, is this a recently change you've noticed, or something that has
been like that for while now?
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email . scrappy(at)hub(dot)org MSN . scrappy(at)hub(dot)org
Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gurjeet Singh | 2009-06-21 21:46:05 | Re: Suppressing occasional failures in copy2 regression test |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2009-06-21 18:29:09 | Re: 8.4 open item: copy performance regression? |