On 2018-10-09 14:32:29 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > On 10/08/2018 09:55 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > > Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@enterprisedb.com> writes: > > > Rebased again. Patches that touch AC_CHECK_FUNCS are fun like that! > > Yeah, I've been burnt by that too recently. It occurs to me we could make > > that at least a little less painful if we formatted the macro with one > > line per function name: > > > > AC_CHECK_FUNCS([ > > cbrt > > clock_gettime > > fdatasync > > ... > > wcstombs_l > > ]) > > > > You'd still get conflicts in configure itself, of course, but that > > doesn't require manual work to resolve -- just re-run autoconf. > > > > > > > > By and large I think it's better not to submit patches with changes to > configure, but to let the committer run autoconf.
> OTOH, this will probably confuse the heck out of the cfbot patch checker. And make life harder for reviewers. -1 on this one. Greetings, Andres Freund
