Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> writes: > On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 12:05:10PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Well, OK, but I'd still like to tweak configure so that it records >> an absolute path for prove rather than just setting PROVE=prove. >> That way you'd at least be able to tell from the configure log >> whether you are possibly at risk.
> That's an improvement. The reason it does that seems to be that we use AC_CHECK_PROGS rather than AC_PATH_PROGS for locating "prove". I can see no particular consistency to the decisions made in configure.in about which to use: AC_CHECK_PROGS(GCOV, gcov) AC_CHECK_PROGS(LCOV, lcov) AC_CHECK_PROGS(GENHTML, genhtml) AC_CHECK_PROGS(DTRACE, dtrace) AC_CHECK_PROGS(XML2_CONFIG, xml2-config) AC_CHECK_PROGS(DBTOEPUB, dbtoepub) AC_CHECK_PROGS(XMLLINT, xmllint) AC_CHECK_PROGS(XSLTPROC, xsltproc) AC_CHECK_PROGS(OSX, [osx sgml2xml sx]) AC_CHECK_PROGS(FOP, fop) AC_CHECK_PROGS(PROVE, prove) versus AC_PATH_PROG(TAR, tar) PGAC_PATH_BISON PGAC_PATH_FLEX PGAC_PATH_PERL PGAC_PATH_PYTHON AC_PATH_PROG(ZIC, zic) PGAC_PATH_TCLCONFIGSH([$with_tclconfig]) I'm tempted to propose that we switch *all* of these uses of AC_CHECK_PROGS to AC_PATH_PROGS. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers