Re: [HACKERS] PL_stashcache, or, what's our minimum Perl version?

Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> writes:
> On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 12:05:10PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, OK, but I'd still like to tweak configure so that it records
>> an absolute path for prove rather than just setting PROVE=prove.
>> That way you'd at least be able to tell from the configure log
>> whether you are possibly at risk.

> That's an improvement.

The reason it does that seems to be that we use AC_CHECK_PROGS
rather than AC_PATH_PROGS for locating "prove".  I can see no
particular consistency to the decisions made in configure.in
about which to use:

AC_CHECK_PROGS(GCOV, gcov)
AC_CHECK_PROGS(LCOV, lcov)
AC_CHECK_PROGS(GENHTML, genhtml)
AC_CHECK_PROGS(DTRACE, dtrace)
AC_CHECK_PROGS(XML2_CONFIG, xml2-config)
AC_CHECK_PROGS(DBTOEPUB, dbtoepub)
AC_CHECK_PROGS(XMLLINT, xmllint)
AC_CHECK_PROGS(XSLTPROC, xsltproc)
AC_CHECK_PROGS(OSX, [osx sgml2xml sx])
AC_CHECK_PROGS(FOP, fop)
AC_CHECK_PROGS(PROVE, prove)

versus

AC_PATH_PROG(TAR, tar)
PGAC_PATH_BISON
PGAC_PATH_FLEX
PGAC_PATH_PERL
PGAC_PATH_PYTHON
AC_PATH_PROG(ZIC, zic)
PGAC_PATH_TCLCONFIGSH([$with_tclconfig])

I'm tempted to propose that we switch *all* of these uses of
AC_CHECK_PROGS to AC_PATH_PROGS.
        regards, tom lane