On Tuesday 23 June 2009 06:43:29 Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Actually, further investigation discloses that someone broke the no-Perl
> >> defense in psql's makefile back in 8.0, and we hadn't noticed till now.
> > Don't we ship sql_help.h in the tarball? I thought that's all the perl
> > was used for in psql.
> Yeah, but the makefile protected that with "ifdef PERL", which stopped
> failing as intended when someone forced some quotes into the value of
> PERL. I'm about to commit something that hopefully will be a bit more
So one would have only seen the difference if there was a timestamp skew in
the unpacked tarball, or indeed perl was indeed missing.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: David E. Wheeler||Date: 2009-06-24 16:05:12|
|Subject: Re: Extensions User Design|
|Previous:||From: Stephen Frost||Date: 2009-06-24 11:32:59|
|Subject: Re: [PATCH] backend: compare word-at-a-time in bcTruelen|