Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: plperl's ppport.h out of date?

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: plperl's ppport.h out of date?
Date: 2006-05-31 21:04:18
Message-ID: 447E04D2.1090501@dunslane.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 11:35:12AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>   
>> FWIW, it looks like a large part of the bloat in the newer file is
>> in-line documentation, which we hardly need to include in our
>> distribution.  I'll leave it to someone more familiar with Perl to
>> determine whether we want to try to use a slimmed-down copy of the
>> up-to-date output.
>>     
>
> Not sure whether it's worth it, but this sed line strips the POD docs:
>
> sed -e '/^=/,/^=cut/d' < ppport.h
>
> Have a nice day,
>   

The changes are a lot more substantive than this, from my quick look.

We'll have to upgrade some day, but for now we are OK. This module is 
regularly updated, but we should only update our copy as needed. I think 
we are good to go with Tom's patch.

cheers

andrew

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Martijn van OosterhoutDate: 2006-05-31 21:11:50
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Magic block for modules
Previous:From: Andreas PflugDate: 2006-05-31 20:54:58
Subject: Re: Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group