On 10/09/2018 02:37 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
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.
Maybe I'm thinking back to the time when we used to use a bunch of old
versions of autoconf ...
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
