Re: PATCH: Compiling PostgreSQL using ActiveState Python 3.2

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Ashesh Vashi <ashesh(dot)vashi(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PATCH: Compiling PostgreSQL using ActiveState Python 3.2
Date: 2011-08-17 19:55:03
Message-ID: 29913.1313610903@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> On ons, 2011-08-17 at 13:20 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> It's not immediately apparent to me why we should think that
>> get_python_lib is less trustworthy than LIBPL; but if someone
>> can make that case, I don't have any objection to this part of
>> the patch.

> The issue, at least for me, is that the file isn't necessarily called
> 'config' anymore. I have
> /usr/lib/python3.2/config-3.2mu

Ah, I see.

> LIBPL exists at least as far back as Python 2.2, so its use should be
> safe.

Yeah, that part of the patch seems sane then.

> Yes, because get_config_vars('LDVERSION') doesn't exist in that version.
> In theory, it would return '2.7', so everything would fit back together,
> but LDVERSION doesn't exist before 3.2.

Could we have the code use 'LDVERSION' if it gets a nonempty result,
and otherwise fall back to the current scheme? But I guess first we
need some details as to why the current scheme isn't sufficient.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-08-17 20:02:18 Re: A note about hash-based catcache invalidations
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2011-08-17 18:36:18 Re: PATCH: Compiling PostgreSQL using ActiveState Python 3.2