Re: ./configure argument checking

От: Bruce Momjian
Тема: Re: ./configure argument checking
Дата: ,
Msg-id: 200610130051.k9D0p1q24490@momjian.us
(см: обсуждение, исходный текст)
Ответ на: Re: ./configure argument checking  (Tom Lane)
Ответы: Re: ./configure argument checking  ("Andrew Dunstan")
Список: pgsql-hackers

Скрыть дерево обсуждения

./configure argument checking  ("Jim C. Nasby", )
 Re: ./configure argument checking  (Andrew Dunstan, )
  Re: ./configure argument checking  (Martijn van Oosterhout, )
   Re: ./configure argument checking  (Bruce Momjian, )
    Re: ./configure argument checking  (Tom Lane, )
     Re: ./configure argument checking  (Bruce Momjian, )
      Re: ./configure argument checking  ("Andrew Dunstan", )
       Re: ./configure argument checking  (Martijn van Oosterhout, )
        Re: ./configure argument checking  (Tom Lane, )
         Re: ./configure argument checking  (Alvaro Herrera, )
          Re: ./configure argument checking  ("Jim C. Nasby", )
           Re: ./configure argument checking  (Tom Lane, )
            Re: ./configure argument checking  ("Jim C. Nasby", )
             Re: ./configure argument checking  (Tom Lane, )
              Re: ./configure argument checking  (Martijn van Oosterhout, )
     Re: ./configure argument checking  (Peter Eisentraut, )
      Re: ./configure argument checking  ("Jim C. Nasby", )
       Re: ./configure argument checking  (Peter Eisentraut, )
        Re: ./configure argument checking  ("Jim C. Nasby", )
        Re: ./configure argument checking  (Peter Eisentraut, )
      Re: ./configure argument checking  (Tom Lane, )

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <> writes:
> > Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> >> IIRC it was made a non-fatal warning somewhere near the end of the
> >> output, but I'm not sure...
> 
> > It spits out this line just before it creates its output files:
> >     *** Option ignored: --with-lkjasdf
> 
> Of course, since it spits out pages and pages of normally-useless trivia,
> we've all become conditioned to ignore configure's output as long as it
> doesn't actually fail :-(
> 
> Not sure what to do about that --- I doubt that raising this warning to
> error would be a good idea, seeing how firmly the upstream developers
> believe it shouldn't even be a warning.  Is there any sort of "quiet
> mode" possible that would report only warnings?  Would it be a good idea
> if it were possible?

I think one idea is a "pedantic" mode that fails if an unrecognized
option is supplied.

--  Bruce Momjian    EnterpriseDB    http://www.enterprisedb.com
 + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате сообщения:

От: "Ivan Zolotukhin"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Fwd: pg_dump VS alter database ... set search_path ...
От: "Albe Laurenz"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [PATCHES] Documentation fix for --with-ldap