Re: WIP: About CMake v2

From: Mark Kirkwood <mark(dot)kirkwood(at)catalyst(dot)net(dot)nz>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Yury Zhuravlev <u(dot)zhuravlev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: WIP: About CMake v2
Date: 2016-11-16 03:00:48
Message-ID: 949f661c-6e7d-3798-4ca7-0c8681b0e864@catalyst.net.nz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Yeah, there seems to be a lot of these. Looking through them almost all
concern the addition of piece of code to wrap putenv. e.g:

--- a/src/bin/psql/command.c
+++ b/src/bin/psql/command.c
@@ -1350,7 +1350,7 @@ exec_command(const char *cmd,
char *newval;

newval = psprintf("%s=%s", envvar, envval);
- putenv(newval);
+ pg_putenv_proxy(newval);
success = true;

/*

Where pg_putenv_proxy either calls putenv or pgwin32_putenv (the latter
on windows I'd guess). I wonder if this could have been avoided, since
the original code handles this sort of thing. There are also some minor
- and not immediately obvious - changes to a number of macros in various
includes...If I'm feeling keen I'll experiment to see how far I can get
without any source changes at all.

regards

Mark

On 09/11/16 08:37, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> There are a number of changes in .[ch] and .pl files that are unclear
> and not explained. Please explain them. You can also submit separate
> preliminary patches if you need to do some refactoring. Ultimately, I
> would expect this patch not to require C code changes.
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Masahiko Sawada 2016-11-16 03:08:01 Re: Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.
Previous Message Etsuro Fujita 2016-11-16 02:55:03 Re: Push down more UPDATEs/DELETEs in postgres_fdw