Hi Andrew, On Feb 4, 2025, at 15:34, Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> wrote:
>> I see. I confirm that works. Still, don’t all the other parameters work when >> passed to any/all targets? Should this one have an extension-specific name? > > IDK, I don't understand what you think you're saying when you specify > --prefix to an extension build (as opposed to an install). I am unfamiliar with that option. Although `prefix` is mentioned in the PGXS docs[1] in the context of other variables, it is not itself documented, neither as `prefix=` as Peter suggests, nor as `--prefix`. At any rate, all the other PGXS variables I’ve used have worked with all the make targets, though they obviously don’t necessarily change the behavior of all of the targets. >> ISTM it does more harm than good. The location of extension files should be >> highly predictable. I think the search path functionality mitigates the need >> for this parameter, and it should be dropped. > > I agree that we should either drop the "directory" directive or fix this > patch so it doesn't break it. I have never used the directive, not sure I was > even aware of its existence, so I have no objection to dropping it. I only just started using it, thinking it keeps things better organized. But it’s honestly a bit confusing, in that one must set both the `MODULEDIR` variable in the `Makefile` and the `directory` variable in the control file. Best, David [1]: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/extend-pgxs.html
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
