Re: Should we use make -k on the buildfarm?
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Should we use make -k on the buildfarm? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4CD86231.4090500@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Should we use make -k on the buildfarm? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Should we use make -k on the buildfarm?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/08/2010 03:38 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut<peter_e@gmx.net> writes: >> On mån, 2010-11-08 at 15:01 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >>> First, the buildfarm doesn't build the docs. That's a deliberate >>> decision, based on the fact that not every member has the required >>> software installed. And second these targets only exist for 9.0 and/or >>> later. >> I'm aware of those issues. I'm just saying you could consolidate things >> along those lines in the long term. > Probably not: your proposal depends on having "make" available, which it > won't be for Windows builds. I doubt Andrew wishes to implement > make-equivalent logic in the buildfarm script. No, and what is more, it runs counter to the philosophy of the buildfarm, which is basically to do by automation what a human would do by hand in building and testing Postgres. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: