Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> On 05/29/2014 08:21 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> Yes, it'd have been nice if this were done a month+ ago. But nobody
>> stepped up :(. Seems like the least bad choice :/
> The most worrying thing is that we didn't find the occasioning problem
> when we switched to autoconf 2.69 back in December, so we end up dealing
> with bad choices now.
I think the main reason for that is that none of the buildfarm animals
were trying to build contrib/uuid-ossp on machines where OSSP UUID is
shaky. Some of our packagers do so, though, and so once the beta got
into their hands we found out about the problem.
Short of adding "try to package according to Debian, Red Hat, etc
packaging recipes" to the buildfarm requirements, there doesn't seem to
be much that we could do to find out about such issues earlier. (And
no, I'm not proposing that as a good idea. As an ex-packager, I know
that those recipes are moving targets because of constantly changing
external requirements. We don't want to take over that maintenance.)
So IMO we just have to expect that beta is going to turn up portability
issues, and we're going to have to do what it takes to resolve them,
even if it's nontrivial.
The good news on this front is that we have substantially more buildfarm
coverage of contrib/uuid-ossp than we had two days ago.
regards, tom lane