From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: VS 2015 support in src/tools/msvc |
Date: | 2016-03-05 14:34:28 |
Message-ID: | 56DAEE74.3010604@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 03/05/2016 12:46 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>> I vote for just using sed considering we need flex and bison anyway.
>> OK cool, we could go with something else than sed to generate probes.h
>> but that seems sensible considering that this should definitely be
>> back-patched. Not sure what the others think about adding a new file
>> in the source tarball by default though.
> AFAIK, sed flex and bison originate from three separate source projects;
> there is no reason to suppose that the presence of flex and bison on a
> particular system guarantee the presence of sed. I thought the proposal
> to get rid of the psed dependence in favor of some more perl code was
> pretty sane.
Here is a translation into perl of the sed script, courtesy of the s2p
incarnation of psed:
<https://gist.github.com/adunstan/d61b1261a4b91496bdc6> The sed script
appears to have been stable for a long time, so I don't think we need to
be too concerned about possibly maintaining two versions.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Browder | 2016-03-05 14:35:54 | Re: Static code checker research worth investigating (Communications of the ACM, 03/2016, Vol. 59, No. 03, p. 99) |
Previous Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2016-03-05 14:25:20 | Re: Freeze avoidance of very large table. |