Re: [HACKERS] PROVE_FLAGS

2017-06-09 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 6/5/17 15:06, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> In that case we're going to need to invent a way to do this similarly >> in vcregress.pl. I'm not simply going to revert to the situation where >> it and the makefiles are completely out of sync on this. The previous >> patch was made more or less by

Re: [HACKERS] PROVE_FLAGS

2017-06-05 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 05/23/2017 06:59 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > On 17 May 2017 at 14:30, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Andrew Dunstan >> wrote: >>> Inheriting variables from the environment is a part of make by design. >>> We have

Re: [HACKERS] PROVE_FLAGS

2017-05-23 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 17 May 2017 at 14:30, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Andrew Dunstan > wrote: >> Inheriting variables from the environment is a part of make by design. >> We have PG_PROVE_FLAGS for our own forced settings. > > I

Re: [HACKERS] PROVE_FLAGS

2017-05-17 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > Inheriting variables from the environment is a part of make by design. > We have PG_PROVE_FLAGS for our own forced settings. I don't buy this argument. We've had previous cases where we've gone through and

Re: [HACKERS] PROVE_FLAGS

2017-05-16 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 05/16/2017 07:44 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 5/3/17 15:14, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> Can someone please explain to me why we have this in Makefile.global.in? >> (from commit e9c81b60 ) >> >> PROVE_FLAGS = >> >> ISTM it's unnecessary, and prevents us from using the same named value >>

Re: [HACKERS] PROVE_FLAGS

2017-05-16 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 5/3/17 15:14, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > Can someone please explain to me why we have this in Makefile.global.in? > (from commit e9c81b60 ) > > PROVE_FLAGS = > > ISTM it's unnecessary, and prevents us from using the same named value > in the environment. I want to be able to use the

Re: [HACKERS] PROVE_FLAGS

2017-05-12 Thread Tom Lane
Michael Paquier writes: > On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 9:05 PM, Andrew Dunstan > wrote: >> Does anyone object to me backpatching this? It seems to me kinda crazy >> to have --verbose hardcoded on the back branches and not on the dev branch.

Re: [HACKERS] PROVE_FLAGS

2017-05-12 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 9:05 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > Does anyone object to me backpatching this? It seems to me kinda crazy > to have --verbose hardcoded on the back branches and not on the dev branch. +1. A maximum of consistency with the test code when

Re: [HACKERS] PROVE_FLAGS

2017-05-12 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 05/04/2017 12:50 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: >> Andrew Dunstan writes: >>> Can someone please explain to me why we have this in Makefile.global.in? >>> (from commit e9c81b60 ) >>> PROVE_FLAGS = >> Before that commit it

Re: [HACKERS] PROVE_FLAGS

2017-05-03 Thread Stephen Frost
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > Andrew Dunstan writes: > > Can someone please explain to me why we have this in Makefile.global.in? > > (from commit e9c81b60 ) > > PROVE_FLAGS = > > Before that commit it was like > > PROVE_FLAGS = --verbose

Re: [HACKERS] PROVE_FLAGS

2017-05-03 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan writes: > Can someone please explain to me why we have this in Makefile.global.in? > (from commit e9c81b60 ) > PROVE_FLAGS = Before that commit it was like PROVE_FLAGS = --verbose which had some value. I agree that now we'd be better

Re: [HACKERS] PROVE_FLAGS

2017-05-03 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 05/03/2017 03:21 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2017-05-03 15:14:27 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> Can someone please explain to me why we have this in Makefile.global.in? >> (from commit e9c81b60 ) >> >> >> PROVE_FLAGS = >> >> >> ISTM it's unnecessary, and prevents us from using the same

Re: [HACKERS] PROVE_FLAGS

2017-05-03 Thread Andres Freund
On 2017-05-03 15:14:27 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > Can someone please explain to me why we have this in Makefile.global.in? > (from commit e9c81b60 ) > > > PROVE_FLAGS = > > > ISTM it's unnecessary, and prevents us from using the same named value > in the environment. I want to be

[HACKERS] PROVE_FLAGS

2017-05-03 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Can someone please explain to me why we have this in Makefile.global.in? (from commit e9c81b60 ) PROVE_FLAGS = ISTM it's unnecessary, and prevents us from using the same named value in the environment. I want to be able to use the environment in vcregress.pl, and I'd like the Make files