| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Shigeru HANADA <hanada(at)metrosystems(dot)co(dot)jp>, KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: security label support, revised |
| Date: | 2010-09-28 14:56:20 |
| Message-ID: | 1285685780.20420.4.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On tis, 2010-09-28 at 09:22 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > I think it should actually be run as part of the regular build.
> Ever
> > since I started using git and developing like 10 features at once,
> and
> > other people doing the same, the chances of (hidden) OID conflicts
> is
> > growing immensely.
>
> Injecting nonessential checks into the build process doesn't seem like
> a good idea to me. Typing 'make' should just do the build. If you
> want to check for breakage, well, that's what 'make check' is for.
I don't feel strongly either way, but if we want to philosophize for a
minute, all these -W option on the compiler command line are
nonessential checks. ;-) I suppose 'make check' should test whether the
code behaves correctly rather than checking whether the code was
structured consistently to begin with.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-09-28 15:07:42 | Re: small fix to possible null pointer dereference in byteaout() varlena.c |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-09-28 14:41:18 | Re: Proposal: plpgsql - "for in array" statement |