Re: PGXS "check" target forcing an install ?
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PGXS "check" target forcing an install ? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoYc2-FkYQK7JGZgXfXBCqohop5dS71Q1Fmaha-p4Tjqeg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PGXS "check" target forcing an install ? (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: PGXS "check" target forcing an install ?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 1:31 AM, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote: >> I tracked the dangerous -rf to come from Makefile.global and it's empty >> string being due to abs_top_builddir not being define in my own Makefile. >> But beside that, which I can probably fix, it doesn't sound correct >> that a "check" rule insists in finding an "install" rule. > > Oops, this is a regression, and a dangerous one indeed. This is caused > by dcae5fac. > > One fix is to use NO_TEMP_INSTALL=yes in Makefile.global in the > context of PGXS, like in the patch attached, this variable needing to > be set before Makefile.global is loaded. We could as well use directly > PGXS in the section "Testing", but that does not sound appealing for > Makefile.global's readability. Gulp. I certainly agree that emitting rm -rf /tmp_install is a scary thing for a PostgreSQL Makefile to be doing. Fortunately, people aren't likely to have a directory under / by that name, and maybe not permissions on it even if they did, but all the same it's not good. I propose trying to guard against that a bit more explicitly, as in the attached. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: