Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Output configuration status after ./configure run.
On ons, 2010-02-10 at 18:25 -0200, Euler Taveira de Oliveira wrote: Alvaro Herrera escreveu: The general idea seems sensible to me. I can't comment on the specifics. +1. A lot of other programs have this summary at the end of configure execution. The problem is that PostgreSQL has too many options. Do we want to list all of them? The reason that a lot of other packages have this sort of display is probably because they use an opportunistic configuration approach, meaning they configure the packages with whatever libraries they happen to find installed at the time. So you don't actually know what you are getting until the end of the configure run. (Clearly, however, a package autobuilder doesn't read that output, so the concept is broken.) PostgreSQL doesn't work that way (for the most part). -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Output configuration status after ./configure run.
Ühel kenal päeval, K, 2010-02-10 kell 21:17, kirjutas Tom Lane: Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote: If this doesn't fit in 24x80 maybe we need to find a more compact way to display things. +1. I wouldn't mind a one-line summary, but a two page summary seems like a lot. So it seems there's some consensus that: 1. This printout should display everything configurable from a configure option, and nothing else (ie, not any of the platform-dependent conclusions that configure draws). Do you mean also CC, CFLAGS, PREFIX, etc? 2. The printout has to be made to fit in 24x80 or so. I'm still quite dubious about the usefulness, but I could live with this if someone explains to me how the printout is going to stay within 24x80 given the inevitable growth in number of configure options ... I'm a bit reluctant to 24x80 requirement. Without this patch one has to scroll a lot more backlog from ./configure (hundreds of lines) to see what changes really applied and also the output is a bit more cryptic. The same goes to ./configure --help. And I don't really know any other ways... And besides, this feature only matters for people who play with the source. Everyone else is already using either binary packages or build systems (like portage). Also: Hmm. That implies that you didn't look at the command that you typed but you did look at its output. I'm not going to say no one does that (who am I to judge?) but it seems kind of strange to me. Yes, strange but I don't really make the connection of blindly typing the command and figuring out what options configure supports... :S -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Output configuration status after ./configure run.
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 2:30 AM, Priit Laes pl...@plaes.org wrote: Also: Hmm. That implies that you didn't look at the command that you typed but you did look at its output. I'm not going to say no one does that (who am I to judge?) but it seems kind of strange to me. Yes, strange but I don't really make the connection of blindly typing the command and figuring out what options configure supports... :S Well if you want to know what options it supports just do ./configure --help ... ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Output configuration status after ./configure run.
Euler Taveira de Oliveira escribió: Tom Lane escreveu: I'm still quite dubious about the usefulness, but I could live with this if someone explains to me how the printout is going to stay within 24x80 given the inevitable growth in number of configure options ... AFAICS, we have 40 configure options. If we want this to fit in 24 rows (i) we should choose popular options or (ii) print only features/packages that have a non-default option/value. Or (iii) display more than one per line, for example Configured PL languages: Perl Python Tcl Configued block sizes: WAL: 8192data: 8192sth else: 16384 There you have six configure options in two lines. Both ideas aren't ideal for machine-readable format (as someone mentioned pgbuildfarm) because the summary is partial My idea regarding buildfarm was to have it for human consumption, not machine readable. -- Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Output configuration status after ./configure run.
Ühel kenal päeval, K, 2010-02-10 kell 10:39, kirjutas Tom Lane: Priit Laes pl...@plaes.org writes: This patch enables showing configure status at the end of ./configure run and thus makes ./configure process a bit easier to follow (in the sense of what features are actually enabled). I don't think anybody actually reads configure's output anyway, so I'm not sure about the point of this. Usually you wish you knew this information long afterwards. We do have tools (pg_config, pg_controldata) for extracting such information from an existing installation, which is the real use-case IMHO. I do. And there are probably others. It provides a list of nicely formatted options that configure enabled/disabled before you start the build process. pg_config and pg_controldata are a bit too late. Also, it's quite unclear which items deserve a place in the list. If it's just to repeat what was in the configure command-line, what is the value of that? It might avoid the 'UU, I forgot to enable python support.', after you have waited a while for the build to finish... Cheers, Priit ;) -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Output configuration status after ./configure run.
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 07:01:19PM +0200, Priit Laes wrote: It might avoid the 'UU, I forgot to enable python support.', after you have waited a while for the build to finish... +1 from me, for that very reason! Ross -- Ross Reedstrom, Ph.D. reeds...@rice.edu Systems Engineer Admin, Research Scientistphone: 713-348-6166 The Connexions Project http://cnx.orgfax: 713-348-3665 Rice University MS-375, Houston, TX 77005 GPG Key fingerprint = F023 82C8 9B0E 2CC6 0D8E F888 D3AE 810E 88F0 BEDE -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Output configuration status after ./configure run.
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Priit Laes pl...@plaes.org wrote: Also, it's quite unclear which items deserve a place in the list. If it's just to repeat what was in the configure command-line, what is the value of that? It might avoid the 'UU, I forgot to enable python support.', after you have waited a while for the build to finish... Hmm. That implies that you didn't look at the command that you typed but you did look at its output. I'm not going to say no one does that (who am I to judge?) but it seems kind of strange to me. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Output configuration status after ./configure run.
Robert Haas escribió: On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Priit Laes pl...@plaes.org wrote: Also, it's quite unclear which items deserve a place in the list. If it's just to repeat what was in the configure command-line, what is the value of that? It might avoid the 'UU, I forgot to enable python support.', after you have waited a while for the build to finish... Hmm. That implies that you didn't look at the command that you typed but you did look at its output. I'm not going to say no one does that (who am I to judge?) but it seems kind of strange to me. Maybe you didn't type it, but it came from elsewhere? Maybe you're inheriting settings from some environment variable, or a file? Maybe you're eval'ing pg_config --configure? The general idea seems sensible to me. I can't comment on the specifics. -- Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Output configuration status after ./configure run.
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 2:16 PM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote: Maybe you didn't type it, but it came from elsewhere? Maybe you're inheriting settings from some environment variable, or a file? Maybe you're eval'ing pg_config --configure? Yeah, could be. The general idea seems sensible to me. I can't comment on the specifics. I took a quick look at it. It's basically just a block of output at the end of configure that reflects the values for a subset of the configuration parameters (for example, just off the top of my head, --enable-debug, --enable-casserts, --enable-depend, and --enable-nls aren't there). It already won't fit in a 24x80 window, and if we actually make it complete, it'll be considerably longer. While not denying its possible usefulness to the OP, I'm not sure that in general more people would find it useful than annoying. I might be wrong, though. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Output configuration status after ./configure run.
Alvaro Herrera escreveu: The general idea seems sensible to me. I can't comment on the specifics. +1. A lot of other programs have this summary at the end of configure execution. The problem is that PostgreSQL has too many options. Do we want to list all of them? -- Euler Taveira de Oliveira http://www.timbira.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Output configuration status after ./configure run.
Euler Taveira de Oliveira escribió: Alvaro Herrera escreveu: The general idea seems sensible to me. I can't comment on the specifics. +1. A lot of other programs have this summary at the end of configure execution. The problem is that PostgreSQL has too many options. Do we want to list all of them? Maybe not all, but my bike is colored PGPORT, and this shed doesn't seem to have anything that combines with that. If this doesn't fit in 24x80 maybe we need to find a more compact way to display things. BTW if this thing is reasonably complete, we could have buildfarm display this output in a summary page for each animal. Seems more readable than configure options. -- Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Output configuration status after ./configure run.
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote: Euler Taveira de Oliveira escribió: Alvaro Herrera escreveu: The general idea seems sensible to me. I can't comment on the specifics. +1. A lot of other programs have this summary at the end of configure execution. The problem is that PostgreSQL has too many options. Do we want to list all of them? Maybe not all, but my bike is colored PGPORT, and this shed doesn't seem to have anything that combines with that. Well said, sir. If this doesn't fit in 24x80 maybe we need to find a more compact way to display things. +1. I wouldn't mind a one-line summary, but a two page summary seems like a lot. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Output configuration status after ./configure run.
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote: If this doesn't fit in 24x80 maybe we need to find a more compact way to display things. +1. I wouldn't mind a one-line summary, but a two page summary seems like a lot. So it seems there's some consensus that: 1. This printout should display everything configurable from a configure option, and nothing else (ie, not any of the platform-dependent conclusions that configure draws). 2. The printout has to be made to fit in 24x80 or so. I'm still quite dubious about the usefulness, but I could live with this if someone explains to me how the printout is going to stay within 24x80 given the inevitable growth in number of configure options ... regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Output configuration status after ./configure run.
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 9:17 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote: If this doesn't fit in 24x80 maybe we need to find a more compact way to display things. +1. I wouldn't mind a one-line summary, but a two page summary seems like a lot. So it seems there's some consensus that: 1. This printout should display everything configurable from a configure option, and nothing else (ie, not any of the platform-dependent conclusions that configure draws). 2. The printout has to be made to fit in 24x80 or so. I'm still quite dubious about the usefulness, but I could live with this if someone explains to me how the printout is going to stay within 24x80 given the inevitable growth in number of configure options ... I'm dubious too. I'm +1 for shorter, but neutral on the idea in general. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Output configuration status after ./configure run.
Tom Lane escreveu: I'm still quite dubious about the usefulness, but I could live with this if someone explains to me how the printout is going to stay within 24x80 given the inevitable growth in number of configure options ... AFAICS, we have 40 configure options. If we want this to fit in 24 rows (i) we should choose popular options or (ii) print only features/packages that have a non-default option/value. Both ideas aren't ideal for machine-readable format (as someone mentioned pgbuildfarm) because the summary is partial i.e. the software needs to know beforehand what are the default configure options. Of course, parsing the configure output and greping the interested options is a boring task but at least it is all there; but it's not a summary. :( -- Euler Taveira de Oliveira http://www.timbira.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
