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

Re: [HACKERS] Re: setsockopt(SO_REUSEADDR) (Re: Call for porting reports)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: "Kardos, Dr(dot) Andreas" <kardos(at)repas-aeg(dot)de>, hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-ports(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: setsockopt(SO_REUSEADDR) (Re: Call for porting reports)
Date: 2000-04-13 06:21:33
Message-ID: 9405.955606893@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-ports
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> OK, I think that's a bug in the Makefile: it should be checking
>> USE_PERL to decide whether to create a build rule for sql-help.h
>> (Peter, do you agree)?

> No. USE_PERL depends on configure --with-perl, which is something
> completely different. The answer is to use AC_CHECK_PROGS(perl, PERL).

That doesn't strike me as sufficient; it is quite likely that that will
find a perl 4.  Does your help-building script run on perl 4?  If not,
you need a more careful check on what sort of perl you have found.
If you want to test for perl 5, go for it.  If not, look at USE_PERL,
which puts it on the user's shoulders to make sure that he's got a
compatible perl.

> The
> alternative answer is to use perl unconditionally and say "too bad, if you
> are not using the distribution you need Perl". The latter actually looks
> cleaner to me now. (After all, the only time the file is rebuilt is when
> the docs change (what user does that?) or the very first time. In the
> latter case doing nothing is not really the answer either.)

No, not good.  We've seen a number of problems due to timestamps being
out of sync in tarballs.  It's better to build psql with a slightly
out-of-date helpfile than to fail to build it at all.  So, the Makefile
should be set up to apply the build rule if a usable perl is available,
otherwise not.

> Have we reached any consensus on making ONLY_REUSE_INET_SOCKETS the
> default (i.e., removing it)? I'm no socket sort of guy but the
> documentation clearly states that address reusing is only defined for Inet
> sockets.

I've stated twice now that I thought that we should never try to do
setsockopt(SO_REUSEADDR) on the Unix socket.  I am going to remove
the ifdef check tomorrow, unless you beat me to it.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-ports by date

Next:From: Thomas LockhartDate: 2000-04-13 16:43:01
Subject: [Fwd: [HACKERS] Porting reports (cont'd)]
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2000-04-13 02:04:27
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: setsockopt(SO_REUSEADDR) (Re: Call for porting reports)

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