Re: PG vs macOS Mojave

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Jakob Egger <jakob(at)eggerapps(dot)at>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PG vs macOS Mojave
Date: 2018-11-02 14:42:21
Message-ID: 18304.1541169741@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I wrote:
> Here's a lightly-tested patch for that approach.

Anybody have an opinion about which approach to use? We need to choose
one, and PDQ too, if we want full buildfarm coverage on it before Monday's
wrap.

The main argument in favor of #1 (restore use of -isysroot) is fear that
Apple's going to force us into that sometime soon anyhow, so we might as
well just bite the bullet instead of inserting weird workarounds to avoid
it. But perhaps that isn't going to happen. If it doesn't, then #2
(hack PLPerl and PLTcl include switches only) should result in slightly
less pain for people in Jakob's situation. But either patch does offer
a workaround for that case.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nathan Bossart 2018-11-02 14:47:08 Re: Use durable_unlink for .ready and .done files for WAL segment removal
Previous Message Robert Haas 2018-11-02 14:38:45 Re: WIP: Avoid creation of the free space map for small tables