| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Seiderer <ps(dot)report(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: configure can't detect proper pthread flags |
| Date: | 2015-03-20 12:05:48 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmobR6d9q_gdggTbBOpMwkJyhm+iYK+Ws8b7cVmGM=nzKvw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 7:01 AM, Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 6:08 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> We don't want every link step producing a useless warning.
>> Ideally, "make -s" would print nothing whatsoever; to the extent that
>> tools produce unsuppressable routine chatter, that's evil because it
>> makes it harder to notice actually-useful warnings.
>
> Then maybe stderr tests should grep output for a specific option, the
> one we're currently testing, not just any noise?
That sounds awfully fragile to me. It can't really be safe to assume
we know precisely what the warning messages will look like. But it
seems to me that compiling every test program with every library we
might need is not a great plan.
(I don't know enough about autoconf to know whether changing that is realistic.)
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2015-03-20 12:06:55 | Re: Parallel Seq Scan |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2015-03-20 12:00:33 | Re: Superuser connect during smart shutdown |