Re: Autoconf 2.69 update
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Autoconf 2.69 update |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 528CD926.2030504@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Autoconf 2.69 update (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/20/2013 10:28 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com > <mailto:andres@2ndquadrant.com>> wrote: > > > On 2013-11-20 09:53:53 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > As a rule, you're not supposed to bother including the configure > output > > script in a submitted diff anyway. Certainly any committer > worth his > > commit bit is going to ignore it and redo autoconf for himself. > > The committer maybe, but it's a PITA for reviewers on machines without > the matching autoconf version around. Which at least currently > frequently isn't packaged anymore... > > > That's going to be a PITA whichever way you go, though, because there > is not one standard about which autoconf version distros have. It's > certainly not all that have 2.69. I frequently do my builds on Ubuntu > 12.04 for example, which has 2.15, 2.59, 2.64 and 2.68 (don't ask me > how they ended up with that combination). > > The point is - regardless of which version you chose, reviewers and > committers are going to have to deal with a local installation in many > cases anyway. So we might be better off just documenting that in a > more clear way. > > And it only matters if you're reviewing things that touch the configure setup. That's a tiny minority of patches. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: