On 08/07/2017 03:36 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan <andrew.duns...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> On 08/07/2017 03:21 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> I'm confused. AFAIK, that commit did not change which "prove" would >>> be used --- at least not unless you change PATH between configure and >>> make. It only changed how specifically that program would be named in >>> Makefile.global. Please clarify how that broke anything. >> That's exactly what we do. See >> <https://github.com/PGBuildFarm/client-code/blob/master/run_build.pl> at >> line 1649. > My goodness, that's ugly. Is it really better than injecting > "PROVE=prove"? (I'd suggest saying that to configure, not make, > so that the configure log bears some resemblance to what you > want done.) > >
This is what we had to do BEFORE the change in this commit. Now it's no longer sufficient. It would certainly be better if we could tell configure a path to prove and a path to the perl we need to test IPC::Run against. e.g. PROVE=/usr/bin/prove PROVE_PERL=/usr/bin/perl configure ... The problem in all this is that we're assuming incorrectly that the perl we use to build against is the same as the perl we need to run the build with. On Msys that's emphatically not true. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
