Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Fri, Dec 22, 2023 at 09:07:21AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > I've done it a bit differently, but the same idea. I have tested that what I > committed passes checks on Unix and works on Windows. Sounds fine by me. Thanks for the quick turnaround! -- Michael signature.asc Description: PGP

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 2023-12-21 Th 18:20, Michael Paquier wrote: On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 03:43:32PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: On 2023-12-21 Th 03:01, Michael Paquier wrote: Andrew, was the original target of pgperlsyncheck committers and hackers who played with the MSVC scripts but could not run sanity

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 03:43:32PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > On 2023-12-21 Th 03:01, Michael Paquier wrote: >> Andrew, was the original target of pgperlsyncheck committers and >> hackers who played with the MSVC scripts but could not run sanity >> checks on Windows (see [1])? > > > yes.

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 2023-12-21 Th 03:01, Michael Paquier wrote: On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 11:39:15PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote: Can't we teach the tool that it should not validate src/tools/win32tzlist.pl on !windows? It's obviously windows specific code, and it's special case enough that there doesn't seem

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 20.12.23 16:43, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 20.12.23 12:40, Andres Freund wrote: Hm, or perhaps we should just get rid of sed use altogether. The sepgsql case is trivially translateable to perl, and postprocess_dtrace.sed isn't much harder. Maybe yeah, but also it seems fine as is and we

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 11:39:15PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote: > Can't we teach the tool that it should not validate src/tools/win32tzlist.pl > on !windows? It's obviously windows specific code, and it's special case > enough that there doesn't seem like a need to develop it on !windows. I am not

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

Hi, On 2023-12-21 08:31:57 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 20.12.23 18:22, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > > On 2023-12-20 We 11:32, Robert Haas wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 11:03 AM Andrew Dunstan > > > wrote: > > > > > This could perhaps be related to this patch removing the module in

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 21.12.23 07:35, vignesh C wrote: I noticed this is because the lex file getting added without escape characters in the C file: #line 2 "D:\postgres\pg_meson\src\backend\utils\adt\jsonpath_scan.l" There were no warnings when I used flex 2.6.4. Did anyone else get these warnings with the flex

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 20.12.23 18:22, Andrew Dunstan wrote: On 2023-12-20 We 11:32, Robert Haas wrote: On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 11:03 AM Andrew Dunstan wrote: This could perhaps be related to this patch removing the module in src/tools/msvc/dummylib/Win32/Registry.pm ? It is. I've fixed the buildfarm to stop

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Wed, 20 Dec 2023 at 21:13, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > On 20.12.23 12:40, Andres Freund wrote: > > Hm, or perhaps we should just get rid of sed use altogether. The sepgsql > > case > > is trivially translateable to perl, and postprocess_dtrace.sed isn't > > much harder. > > Maybe yeah, but

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 07:00:50PM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > On 20 Dec 2023, at 18:22, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> Yes, the module will normally be present on a Windows perl. The >> only reason we had dummylib was so we could check the perl scripts on >> Unix. > > Thanks for taking care of

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

> On 20 Dec 2023, at 18:22, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > On 2023-12-20 We 11:32, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 11:03 AM Andrew Dunstan wrote: This could perhaps be related to this patch removing the module in src/tools/msvc/dummylib/Win32/Registry.pm ? >>> It is. I've fixed

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 2023-12-20 We 11:32, Robert Haas wrote: On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 11:03 AM Andrew Dunstan wrote: This could perhaps be related to this patch removing the module in src/tools/msvc/dummylib/Win32/Registry.pm ? It is. I've fixed the buildfarm to stop checking this script. Thanks! But I

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 11:03 AM Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > This could perhaps be related to this patch removing the module in > > src/tools/msvc/dummylib/Win32/Registry.pm ? > > It is. I've fixed the buildfarm to stop checking this script. Thanks! But I wonder whether the script itself also

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 2023-12-20 We 08:31, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: On 20 Dec 2023, at 01:48, Michael Paquier wrote: On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 05:03:28PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: Your suggestion to create a new sect2 for "Windows" as much as Andres' suggestion are OK by as an intermediate step, and I

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 20.12.23 12:40, Andres Freund wrote: Hm, or perhaps we should just get rid of sed use altogether. The sepgsql case is trivially translateable to perl, and postprocess_dtrace.sed isn't much harder. Maybe yeah, but also it seems fine as is and we can easily fix the present issue ... OTOH,

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

> On 20 Dec 2023, at 01:48, Michael Paquier wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 05:03:28PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: >> Your suggestion to create a new sect2 for "Windows" as much as Andres' >> suggestion are OK by as an intermediate step, and I suspect that the >> end result will likely not

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 2023-12-20 16:15:55 +0530, vignesh C wrote: > On Tue, 19 Dec 2023 at 20:54, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > > > On 18.12.23 14:52, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > >> 2) I had seen that if sed/gzip is not available meson build will fail: > > >> 2.a) > > >> Program gsed sed found: NO > > >>

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Tue, 19 Dec 2023 at 20:54, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > On 18.12.23 14:52, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > >> 2) I had seen that if sed/gzip is not available meson build will fail: > >> 2.a) > >> Program gsed sed found: NO > >> meson.build:334:6: ERROR: Program 'gsed sed' not found or not executable

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 2023-12-20 09:48:37 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 05:03:28PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > > Your suggestion to create a new sect2 for "Windows" as much as Andres' > > suggestion are OK by as an intermediate step, and I suspect that the > > end result will likely not

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 20.12.23 02:14, Michael Paquier wrote: Hmm. Interesting. So this basically comes down to the fact that GZIP and TAR are required in ./configure because distcheck has a hard dependency on both, but we don't support this target in meson. Is that right? No, the issue is that gzip and tar

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 19.12.23 17:44, Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote: I think we need to require sed when dtrace or selinux is found, not by looking at the return value of the get_option().enabled(). Right. I think the correct condition would be sed = find_program(get_option('SED'), 'sed', native: true,

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 04:24:02PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Here are patches for these two issues. More testing would be appreciated. > > --- a/contrib/basebackup_to_shell/meson.build > +++ b/contrib/basebackup_to_shell/meson.build > @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ tests += { > 'tests': [ >

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 05:03:28PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > Your suggestion to create a new sect2 for "Windows" as much as Andres' > suggestion are OK by as an intermediate step, and I suspect that the > end result will likely not be that. It took me some time to get back to this one, and

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 02:52:41PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 18.12.23 11:49, vignesh C wrote: >> Few comments: >> 1) Now that the MSVC build scripts are removed, should we have the >> reference to "MSVC build scripts" here? >> ltree.h: > > I think this note is correct and can be kept,

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

Hi, On Tue, 19 Dec 2023 at 18:24, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > On 18.12.23 14:52, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > >> 2) I had seen that if sed/gzip is not available meson build will fail: > >> 2.a) > >> Program gsed sed found: NO > >> meson.build:334:6: ERROR: Program 'gsed sed' not found or not

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Tue Dec 19, 2023 at 9:24 AM CST, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 18.12.23 14:52, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> 2) I had seen that if sed/gzip is not available meson build will fail: >> 2.a) >> Program gsed sed found: NO >> meson.build:334:6: ERROR: Program 'gsed sed' not found or not executable > >

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 18.12.23 14:52, Peter Eisentraut wrote: 2) I had seen that if sed/gzip is not available meson build will fail: 2.a) Program gsed sed found: NO meson.build:334:6: ERROR: Program 'gsed sed' not found or not executable Yes, this would need to be improved.  Currently, sed is only required if

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 18.12.23 11:49, vignesh C wrote: Few comments: 1) Now that the MSVC build scripts are removed, should we have the reference to "MSVC build scripts" here? ltree.h: I think this note is correct and can be kept, as it explains the historical context. 2) I had seen that if sed/gzip is not

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Wed, 6 Dec 2023 at 12:59, Michael Paquier wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 12:15:50PM +0530, Shubham Khanna wrote: > > Patch is not applying. Please share the Rebased Version. Please find the > > error: > > Thanks. Here you go with a v6. Few comments: 1) Now that the MSVC build scripts

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 11:43:14AM +0900, NINGWEI CHEN wrote: > Sorry for the delayed response. > We are currently working on transitioning to meson build at hamerkop and > anticipating that this can be accomplished by no later than January. > > If the old build scripts are removed before that,

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 17:05:24 +0900 Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 12:17:04PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > On 2023-09-26 Tu 01:25, NINGWEI CHEN wrote: > >> hamerkop is not yet prepared for Meson builds, but we plan to work on this > >> support soon. > >> If we go with Meson

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 2023-12-13 We 09:23, Michael Paquier wrote: On Tue, Dec 05, 2023 at 07:29:59AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: Okay. Thanks for the update. While in Prague, Andres and Peter E. have mentioned me that we perhaps had better move on with this patch sooner than later, without waiting for the

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Tue, Dec 05, 2023 at 07:29:59AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > Okay. Thanks for the update. While in Prague, Andres and Peter E. have mentioned me that we perhaps had better move on with this patch sooner than later, without waiting for the two buildfarm members to do the switch because much

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Fri, Dec 08, 2023 at 08:50:47AM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote: > . o O { I wish master would systematically drop support for compilers > that were out of 'mainstream' vendor support. } Calling for a patch once, twice ;p FWIW, I would not mind marking VS 2019 as the minimum requirement on HEAD

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 5:27 AM Andrew Dunstan wrote: > But the VS2019 compiler implements enough of C99 to pass our meson test, > unlike VS2017. Maybe the test is too strict. After all, we know we can > in fact build with the earlier versions. . o O { I wish master would systematically drop

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

Hi, On 2023-12-07 13:49:44 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > On 2023-12-07 Th 12:34, Andres Freund wrote: > > However: I used godbolt to compile the test code on msvc, and it seems to > > build with 19.15 (which is the version Andrew referenced upthread), with a > > warning that's triggered

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 2023-12-07 Th 12:34, Andres Freund wrote: Hi, On 2023-12-07 12:33:35 +0100, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Well, We have things like these typedef struct _archiveOpts { ... } ArchiveOpts; #define ARCHIVE_OPTS(...) &(ArchiveOpts){__VA_ARGS__} XL_ROUTINE is quite similar. These are then

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

Hi, On 2023-12-07 12:33:35 +0100, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Well, We have things like these > > typedef struct _archiveOpts > { > ... > } ArchiveOpts; > #define ARCHIVE_OPTS(...) &(ArchiveOpts){__VA_ARGS__} > > XL_ROUTINE is quite similar. > > These are then used like >

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

Hi, On 2023-12-04 15:11:47 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > I just had a look at shifting bowerbird to use meson, and it got stymied at > the c99 test, which apparently doesn't compile with anything less than > VS2019. What error or warning is being raised by msvc? Andres

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 2023-Dec-07, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 06.12.23 21:52, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > Yes, if I comment out the call to structfunc() the test passes on VS2017 > > (compiler version 19.15.26726) > > This is strange, because we use code like that in the tree. There must be > some small detail

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 06.12.23 21:52, Andrew Dunstan wrote: On 2023-12-06 We 12:24, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 06.12.23 17:27, Andrew Dunstan wrote: But the VS2019 compiler implements enough of C99 to pass our meson test, unlike VS2017. Maybe the test is too strict. After all, we know we can in fact build with

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 2023-12-06 We 12:24, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 06.12.23 17:27, Andrew Dunstan wrote: But the VS2019 compiler implements enough of C99 to pass our meson test, unlike VS2017. Maybe the test is too strict. After all, we know we can in fact build with the earlier versions. I just realized

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 06.12.23 17:27, Andrew Dunstan wrote: But the VS2019 compiler implements enough of C99 to pass our meson test, unlike VS2017. Maybe the test is too strict. After all, we know we can in fact build with the earlier versions. I just realized that the C99 test is actually our own, not provided

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 2023-12-06 We 01:18, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 04.12.23 21:11, Andrew Dunstan wrote: I just had a look at shifting bowerbird to use meson, and it got stymied at the c99 test, which apparently doesn't compile with anything less than VS2019. If that is the case, then wouldn't that

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 6:31 AM Michael Paquier wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 05:07:03PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2023-11-15 13:49:06 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > > Where "Windows" actually seems to solely describe visual studio? That seems > > confusing. > > Yeah, switch that

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 04.12.23 21:11, Andrew Dunstan wrote: I just had a look at shifting bowerbird to use meson, and it got stymied at the c99 test, which apparently doesn't compile with anything less than VS2019. If that is the case, then wouldn't that invalidate the documented claim that you can build with

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Mon, Dec 04, 2023 at 03:11:47PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > I just had a look at shifting bowerbird to use meson, and it got stymied at > the c99 test, which apparently doesn't compile with anything less than > VS2019. > > I can upgrade bowerbird, but that will take rather longer. It looks

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 2023-12-04 Mo 03:05, Michael Paquier wrote: On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 12:17:04PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: On 2023-09-26 Tu 01:25, NINGWEI CHEN wrote: hamerkop is not yet prepared for Meson builds, but we plan to work on this support soon. If we go with Meson builds exclusively right

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 12:17:04PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > On 2023-09-26 Tu 01:25, NINGWEI CHEN wrote: >> hamerkop is not yet prepared for Meson builds, but we plan to work on this >> support soon. >> If we go with Meson builds exclusively right now, we will have to >> temporarily remove

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 08:00:09AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > I had suggested this arrangement as a way to reduce churn in this patch set. > We'd just move over the existing separate chapter into a new section, and > then later consider further rearrangements. > > It's not always clear where

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 16.11.23 02:07, Andres Freund wrote: It doesn't seem like your patch has it quite that way? I see MinGW ... Windows Where "Windows" actually seems to solely describe visual studio? That seems confusing. I had suggested this arrangement as a way to reduce churn in this

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 11:27:13AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > (Note, however, that your rebase didn't pick up commits e7814b40d0 and > b41b1a7f49 that I did yesterday. Please check that again.) Indeed. I need to absorb that properly. -- Michael signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 15.11.23 05:49, Michael Paquier wrote: Attached is a v4. I'm happy with that. (Note, however, that your rebase didn't pick up commits e7814b40d0 and b41b1a7f49 that I did yesterday. Please check that again.)

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

Other than the documentation details and the business about Gen_dummy_probes, which has been dealt with separately, this patch looks solid to me. On 12.10.23 07:23, Michael Paquier wrote: On Thu, Oct 05, 2023 at 09:38:51AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: - I think we can't just delete

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 13.11.23 06:30, Michael Paquier wrote: On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 08:38:21AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: How about this patch as a comprehensive solution? 8 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 339 deletions(-) Thanks for the patch. The numbers are here, and the patch looks sensible. The

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 08:38:21AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > How about this patch as a comprehensive solution? > 8 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 339 deletions(-) Thanks for the patch. The numbers are here, and the patch looks sensible. The contents of probes.h without --enable-trace

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 09.11.23 00:05, Michael Paquier wrote: Attached is a Perl version of the sed script, converted by hand (so not the super-verbose s2p thing). It's basically just the sed script with semicolons added and the backslashes in the regular expressions moved around. I think we could use something

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Wed, Nov 08, 2023 at 09:41:19AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > I don't think we should rely on sed being there on Windows. Maybe it's true > now on the handful of buildfarm/CI machines and early adopters, but do we > have any indication that that is systematic or just an accident? Or both?

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 2023-11-08 We 03:41, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 12.10.23 07:23, Michael Paquier wrote: - Is src/backend/utils/README.Gen_dummy_probes still correct after this? AFAICT, the Perl-based MSVC build system uses Gen_dummy_probes.pl, but the meson build uses Gen_dummy_probes.sed even on Windows. 

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 12.10.23 07:23, Michael Paquier wrote: - Is src/backend/utils/README.Gen_dummy_probes still correct after this? AFAICT, the Perl-based MSVC build system uses Gen_dummy_probes.pl, but the meson build uses Gen_dummy_probes.sed even on Windows. Is that correct, intended? Interesting point.

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 02.10.23 09:38, Michael Paquier wrote: Attached is a v2 with these adjustments, for now. General comments: - I think we can't just delete install-windows.sgml. Some of that content needs to be moved over to installation.sgml. As a simple example, install-windows.sgml shows which MSVC

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 22.09.23 03:12, Michael Paquier wrote: It has been mentioned a few times now that, as Meson has been integrated in the tree, the next step would be to get rid of the custom scripts in src/tools/msvc/ and moving forward only support Meson when building with VS compilers. As far as I

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 2023-09-26 Tu 01:25, NINGWEI CHEN wrote: On Fri, 22 Sep 2023 10:12:29 +0900 Michael Paquier wrote: As of today, I can see that the only buildfarm members relying on these scripts are bowerbird and hamerkop, so these two would fail if the patch attached were to be applied today. I am

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Fri, 22 Sep 2023 10:12:29 +0900 Michael Paquier wrote: > As of today, I can see that the only buildfarm members relying on > these scripts are bowerbird and hamerkop, so these two would fail if > the patch attached were to be applied today. I am adding Andrew > D. and the maintainers of

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 2023-09-21 Th 21:12, Michael Paquier wrote: As of today, I can see that the only buildfarm members relying on these scripts are bowerbird and hamerkop, so these two would fail if the patch attached were to be applied today. I am adding Andrew D. and the maintainers of hamerkop (SRA-OSS) in

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 08:06:57AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > First we need to fix things so that we can build using meson from a > distribution tarball, which is the subject of > . Thanks, missed this one. -- Michael signature.asc Description:

Re: Remove MSVC scripts from the tree

On 22.09.23 03:12, Michael Paquier wrote: It has been mentioned a few times now that, as Meson has been integrated in the tree, the next step would be to get rid of the custom scripts in src/tools/msvc/ and moving forward only support Meson when building with VS compilers. First we need to fix