Re: MSVC build scripts status

Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 11:51:47PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>>> However, neither the new nor the old scripts run ECPG tests on my setup, 
>>> so I have been unable to test that.
>> I'm confused.  We have MSVC buildfarm animals that show green, so aren't
>> they getting through ECPG tests?
> 
> Yeah, I'm confused too. I thought they did, but looking at my own animal
> (Skylark) it seems not to be running any ecpg checks?

$CONFUSION++

> Oh, and I'm now seeing failures on my dev box with ECPG on the MSVC build
> using "the old way" (.bat-files):
>     array_of_struct.c
>     array_of_struct.pgc(26): error C2065: 'customer' : undeclared identifier
>     array_of_struct.pgc(26): error C2146: syntax error : missing ';' before identifier 'custs1'
>     array_of_struct.pgc(26): error C2065: 'custs1' : undeclared identifier
>     array_of_struct.pgc(26): error C2109: subscript requires array or pointer type
>     array_of_struct.pgc(27): error C2065: 'cust_ind' : undeclared identifier
>     array_of_struct.pgc(27): error C2146: syntax error : missing ';' before identifier 'inds'
>     array_of_struct.pgc(27): error C2065: 'inds' : undeclared identifier
>     array_of_struct.pgc(27): error C2109: subscript requires array or pointer type
>     array_of_struct.pgc(33): error C2275: 'customer2' : illegal use of this type as an expression
>     array_of_struct.pgc(32) : see declaration of 'customer2'
> 
> 
> (it goes on like that for quite a bit, total of 70 errors in this file)

Yup, seeing that here from a manual run.

> If this has never run on the buildfarm, my guess is that it's been broken
> for about 5 weeks - when the "major rewrite" got in.
> 
> Can someone confirm if this has ever executed on the buildfarm? Or if they
> the same errors with HEAD that I do? I haven't been running ecpgcheck
> manually for quite a while, since I thought it was on the bf run.

Same 70 errors here. Looking at my MSVC BF animals, I see no evidence 
that they ever ran ECPGCheck :-(

/D