Re: Regression tests fail with musl libc because libpq.so can't be loaded

On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 09:36:19AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 09:33:38AM +0100, walther@technowledgy.de wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian:
> > > I suggest we use the #ifdef test to continue our existing behavior for
> > > the libraries we know about, like glibc, and use the LD_* process title
> > > truncation hack for libc's we don't recognize.
> > > 
> > > Attached is a prototype patch which implements this based on previous
> > > patches.
> > 
> > The condition to check for linux/glibc in your patch is slightly off:
> > 
> >   #if ! defined(__linux__) || (! defined(__GLIBC__) && defined(__UCLIBC__ ))
> > 
> > should be
> > 
> >   #if defined(__linux__) && ! (defined(__GLIBC__) || defined(__UCLIBC__ ))
> > 
> > With the latter, it passes tests with musl.
> 
> Yes, my logic was wrong. Not sure what I was thinking, frankly.
> 
> I am not a big fan of negating a complex conditional, but would rather
> pass the negation into the conditional, new patch attached.

With no one "hoping this patch dies in a fire"*, I have updated it with
more details, which I now think is committable to master.  Is this
something to backpatch?  Seems too rare a bug to me.

* Robert Haas,
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BTgmoYsyrCNmg%2BYh6rgP7K8r-bYPjCeF1tPxENRFwD4VZAZvw%40mail.gmail.com

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        https://momjian.us
  EDB                                      https://enterprisedb.com

  Only you can decide what is important to you.