Re: Remove distprep

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Peter Eisentraut
Тема Re: Remove distprep
Дата
Msg-id 07cdf821-e5ef-4cb0-bef6-7c03f7b8770c@eisentraut.org
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Remove distprep  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Ответы Re: Remove distprep  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 09.10.23 17:14, Andres Freund wrote:
> It kinda works, but I'm not sure how well.  Because the aliasing happens in
> Makefile.global, we won't know about the "original" maintainer-clean target
> once recursing into a subdir.
> 
> That's perhaps OK, because extensions likely won't utilize subdirectories? But
> I'm not sure. I know that some people build postgres extensions by adding them
> to contrib/, in those cases it won't work.
> 
> OTOH, it seems somewhat unlikely that maintainer-clean is utilized much in
> extensions. I see it in things like postgis, but that has it's own configure
> etc, even though it also invokes pgxs.

I thought about this.  I don't think this is something that any 
extension would use.  If they care about the distinction between 
distclean and maintainer-clean, are they also doing their own distprep 
and dist?  Seems unlikely.  I mean, if some extension is actually 
affected, I'm happy to accommodate, but we can deal with that when we 
learn about it.  Moreover, if we are moving forward in this direction, 
we would presumably also like the extensions to get rid of their 
distprep step.

So I think we are ready to move ahead with this patch.  There have been 
some light complaints earlier in this thread that people wanted to keep 
some way to clean only some of the files.  But there hasn't been any 
concrete follow-up on that, as far as I can see, so I don't know what to 
do about that.




В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Peter Eisentraut
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: GUC names in messages
Следующее
От: Laurenz Albe
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: GUC names in messages