Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Frustrating issue with PGXS

From: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Eddie Stanley <eddiewould(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, mux(at)elvis(dot)mu(dot)org
Subject: Re: Frustrating issue with PGXS
Date: 2007-06-25 18:46:35
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Dear Tom,

>> That would break existing Makefiles that use the "please take the first
>> pg_config in the path" feature, which rather make sense (it just means
>> that you want the extension for your current postgresql).
> How would it break them?  The default definition is still PG_CONFIG =
> pg_config, this just moves where that definition appears.

I think that I was answering to:

Tom> I'm not sure though how to get this setting to
Tom> override the one in ... 
Tom> or should we just remove that one?

With the assumption that the above "that one" refered to the "PG_CONFIG" 
macro definition in "". As existing extension makefiles do 
not defined PG_CONFIG, relying on one would break them wrt future 
releases? That's why I suggested to replace the "" 
definition by a conditional one.

But it is also entirely possible that I did not fully understand your 


In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-06-25 19:14:27
Subject: Re: Frustrating issue with PGXS
Previous:From: Fabien COELHODate: 2007-06-25 18:35:17
Subject: Re: Frustrating issue with PGXS

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group