Re: Sanity checking for ./configure options?

From: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
To: Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Sanity checking for ./configure options?
Date: 2016-02-05 16:08:52
Message-ID: 20160205160852.GA22825@fetter.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 06:02:57PM -0600, Jim Nasby wrote:
> I just discovered that ./configure will happily accept '--with-pgport=' (I
> was actually doing =$PGPORT, and didn't realize $PGPORT was empty). What you
> end up with is a compile error in guc.c, with no idea why it's broken. Any
> reason not to have configure or at least make puke if pgport isn't valid?

That seems like a good idea.

I've been getting rejection to happen with phrases like

--with-pgport=${PGPORT:?}

which while it looks a little odd, only adds 4 characters to each
shell variable.

Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tomas Vondra 2016-02-05 17:11:42 Re: silent data loss with ext4 / all current versions
Previous Message Filip Rembiałkowski 2016-02-05 15:17:40 proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional