| From: | YUriy Zhuravlev <u(dot)zhuravlev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: WIP: About CMake v2 |
| Date: | 2015-11-26 10:33:28 |
| Message-ID: | 1638284.A3YGmiYSRS@dinodell |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thursday 26 November 2015 01:29:37 Euler Taveira wrote:
> I give it a try. Nice WIP. IMHO you should try to support cmake version
> that are available in the stable releases. Looking at [1], I think the
> best choice is 2.8.11 (because it will cover Red Hat based distros and
> also Debian based ones). Are you using a new feature from 3.1? I mean,
> it should be nice to cover old stable releases, if it is possible.
Maybe you are right. But by the time I finish my work I think 3.0 will become
a standard. CMake is developing rapidly and soon will have version 3.4.1
And one more thing: a normal documentation came with 3.0. :)
But I try to check my code for 2.8.11, now I have 3.4.0 (latest for Gentoo).
Thanks.
--
YUriy Zhuravlev
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2015-11-26 12:03:53 | Re: pg_stat_replication log positions vs base backups |
| Previous Message | Kouhei Kaigai | 2015-11-26 10:27:58 | Re: CustomScan in a larger structure (RE: CustomScan support on readfuncs.c) |