Re: Should contrib modules install .h files?
От | Andrew Gierth |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Should contrib modules install .h files? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 87a7q4adnk.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Should contrib modules install .h files? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Should contrib modules install .h files?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: Tom> Maybe this all just works without much thought, but given that Tom> smart people like Peter E. seem to be unsure of that, I'd sure Tom> like to see a concrete set of rules that extensions should follow Tom> for this. I'll comment on the more substantive stuff later since I just noticed a few relevant points that I need to investigate. But while investigating, I found... Tom> There's also a question of whether we need to change anything in Tom> contrib/ so that it plays by whatever rules we set. There's an Tom> expectation that contrib modules should be buildable with PGXS, Tom> so they need to follow the rules. ... that at least all of the *_plperl transform modules in contrib/ fail to build with USE_PGXS already (i.e. for as long as they have ever existed), because they rely on plperl_helpers.h which is never installed anywhere, and trying to get it via $(top_srcdir) obviously can't work in PGXS. Haven't tried the python ones yet. -- Andrew.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: