Re: Why --backup-and-modify-in-place in perltidy config?

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Why --backup-and-modify-in-place in perltidy config?
Date: 2016-08-23 00:20:31
Message-ID: 20160823002031.GF13292@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 10:19:12AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> > On 08/14/2016 04:38 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I did a trial run following the current pgindent README procedure, and
> >> noticed that the perltidy step left me with a pile of '.bak' files
> >> littering the entire tree. This seems like a pretty bad idea because
> >> a naive "git add ." would have committed them. It's evidently because
> >> src/tools/pgindent/perltidyrc includes --backup-and-modify-in-place.
>
> BTW, after experimenting with this, I did not find any way to get perltidy
> to overwrite the original files without making a backup file.

Yep, that's why --backup-and-modify-in-place had to be used. I have a
local script to remove file with specified extentions, but didn't
document that cleanup step.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Craig Ringer 2016-08-23 00:27:01 Re: PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2016-08-23 00:18:09 Re: Server crash due to SIGBUS(Bus Error) when trying to access the memory created using dsm_create().