On 2018-10-09 14:32:29 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> On 10/08/2018 09:55 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> > > Rebased again. Patches that touch AC_CHECK_FUNCS are fun like that!
> > Yeah, I've been burnt by that too recently. It occurs to me we could make
> > that at least a little less painful if we formatted the macro with one
> > line per function name:
> >
> > AC_CHECK_FUNCS([
> > cbrt
> > clock_gettime
> > fdatasync
> > ...
> > wcstombs_l
> > ])
> >
> > You'd still get conflicts in configure itself, of course, but that
> > doesn't require manual work to resolve -- just re-run autoconf.
> >
> >
>
>
>
> By and large I think it's better not to submit patches with changes to
> configure, but to let the committer run autoconf.
> OTOH, this will probably confuse the heck out of the cfbot patch checker.
And make life harder for reviewers.
-1 on this one.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
