On Sunday 22 September 2013 01:34:53 Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On Thu, 2013-07-25 at 17:07 +0200, Ronan Dunklau wrote: > > I am using approximatively the layout that was proposed here: > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/51bb1b6e.2070...@dunslane.net > > It looks like everything is hard-coded to take the source and the > > gcda, gcno files in the base directory, but these files lay in a src > > directory with the proposed layout. > > The PostgreSQL build system isn't going to work very well if you build > files outside of the current directory. If you want to put your source > files into a src/ subdirectory, then your top-level makefile should to a > $(MAKE) -C src, and you need to have a second makefile in the src > directory. If you do that, then the existing coverage targets will work > alright, I think.
The PGXS build system allows for the definition of an OBJS variable, which works fine with almost every other make target. Maybe we need to take a step back, and think about what kind of extension layouts we want to support ? At the time of this writing, the HOW TO on http://manager.pgxn.org/howto "strongly encourage" to put all C-files in an src directory. As a result, many extensions on pgxn use this layout. It would be great not to have to change them to measure code coverage.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
