Re: Bugfix and new feature for PGXS

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: cedric(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Bugfix and new feature for PGXS
Date: 2013-07-01 21:04:47
Message-ID: 51D1EEEF.1030109@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On 07/01/2013 04:39 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 6/29/13 1:54 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> I haven't seen a response to this. One thing we are missing is
>> documentation. Given that I'm inclined to commit all of this (i.e.
>> cedric's patches 1,2,3, and 4 plus my addition).
> Could someone post an updated set of patches that is currently under
> consideration?

See what I actually committed today.

>
>> I'm also inclined to backpatch it, since without that it seems to me
>> unlikely packagers will be able to make practical use of it for several
>> years, and the risk is very low.
> Actually, the risk of makefile changes is pretty high, especially in
> cases involving advanced features such as vpath. GNU make hasn't been
> as stable is one might think, lately. We should carefully consider
> exactly which parts are worth backpatching.
>
>

These changes are fairly small and mostly non-invasive, but if I've
broken something we should find out about it fairly quickly, I hope.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2013-07-01 21:07:20 Re: changeset generation v5-01 - Patches & git tree
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2013-07-01 21:03:22 Re: pg_resetxlog -m documentation not up to date