Re: pg_upgrade versus MSVC build scripts

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade versus MSVC build scripts
Date: 2010-05-12 22:07:59
Message-ID: 6341.1273702079@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> Uh, if you do 'make install' in the pg_upgrade directory, would it also
> install the shared lib contrib? If not, it seems kind of complicated
> from a user perspective. Can't we pass a 'make' down into a
> subdirectory and have a separate Makefile just run?

No. You're still failing to consider the MSVC build case.

I think that anyone who can cope with building pg_upgrade from source
can deal with building pg_upgrade_sysoids in addition, especially if
the documentation tells him to. In practice, 99% of users just build
(or install) all of contrib/ at once, I think, so it's unlikely to
affect them much anyway.

I understand your desire to save one step in the build process, but
I don't think it's worth contorting our build system for --- especially
since pg_migrator isn't likely to stay in contrib indefinitely.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2010-05-12 22:35:18 Re: pg_upgrade versus MSVC build scripts
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2010-05-12 22:05:42 Re: pg_upgrade versus MSVC build scripts