Re: [RFC] building postgres with meson - v12
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [RFC] building postgres with meson - v12 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2679face-90c2-d031-01f5-dfadac710d6f@enterprisedb.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [RFC] building postgres with meson - v12 (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 02.09.22 18:57, Andres Freund wrote: > Is it worth running ninja -t missingdeps as a test? At the time we run tests > we'll obviously have built and thus collected "real" dependencies, so we would > have the necessary information to determine whether dependencies are missing. > I think it'd be fine to do so only for ninja >= 1.11, rather than falling back > to the llvm python implementation, which is much slower (0.068s vs > 3.760s). And also because it's not as obvious how to include the python script. > > Alternatively, we could just document that ninja -t missingdeps is worth > running. Perhaps at the top of the toplevel build.meson file? In the GNU/make world there is a distinction between "check" and "maintainer-check" for this kind of thing. I think here if we put these kinds of things into a different, what's the term, "suite", then that would be a clear way to collect them and be able to run them all easily.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: