On 2019-Jan-22, Andres Freund wrote:
> I think its plain wrong to add COPT to CXXFLAGS. Re PROFILE I'm on the
> fence. I personally think the pgxs stuff is a bit separate, and I'm
> doubtful we ought to backpatch that. I'm basically planning to apply
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20190107091734.GA1582%40msg.credativ.de
> to 11-, minus the PGXS stuff. If we want that, we ought to apply it to
> master only IMO.
I don't understand why you don't want to backpatch the PGXS bits. Is
there something working today that would be broken by it? I think
you're worried about places that invoke makefiles with PG_CXXFLAGS set
and expecting the value not to be propagated. Is that a scenario we
need to worry about?
The patch neglects to update extend.sgml with the new pgxs variable,
though.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
