Re: should Makefile.custom be in source tree or in build tree?

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

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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?