From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: should Makefile.custom be in source tree or in build tree? |
Date: | 2011-12-06 19:42:25 |
Message-ID: | 13927.1323200545@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Excerpts from Peter Eisentraut's message of mar dic 06 16:06:57 -0300 2011:
>> Makefile.custom is currently looked for in the source directory. This
>> tripped me up recently when doing a vpath build. Should it be looked
>> for in the build tree instead? Or both?
> Hmm, interesting question. When I have used it, I put it in the source
> dir without thinking much about it. In the builddir it'd be painful I
> think because it'd be gone when the builddir is zapped to do a full
> rebuild (I don't do this often but it does happen from time to time).
Yeah, to the extent that I use vpath builds at all, it's with the
expectation that I can rm -rf the build tree and not lose anything
interesting. So I'd be sad if the ability to keep Makefile.custom
in the source tree disappeared.
However, I have no objection to looking first in the build tree and
second in the source tree, if you can get it to do that easily.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-12-06 19:53:42 | Re: Large number of open(2) calls with bulk INSERT into empty table |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2011-12-06 19:21:09 | Re: should Makefile.custom be in source tree or in build tree? |