Peter Eisentraut <> writes:
> On 7/31/17 16:54, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Maybe "which" isn't the best tool for the job, not sure.

> Yeah, "which" is not portable.  This would need a bit more work and
> portability testing.

Fair enough.  This late in beta is probably not the time to be adding new
portability testing needs.  However, I noticed that some places --- not
consistently everywhere --- were solving this with the low-tech method of
just skipping AC_PATH_PROG if the variable is already set.  We could apply
that hack more consistently by inventing a PGAC_PATH_PROGS wrapper macro
as I previously sketched, but for now just defining it as

# Let the user override the search for $1
if test -z "$$1"; then

(untested, but you get the idea).  In the long run I would like to improve
this to force the supplied value into absolute-path form, but I'd be
content to ship v10 like that.

                        regards, tom lane

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to