Re: PostgreSQL-9.0alpha: jade required? - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: PostgreSQL-9.0alpha: jade required?
Date
Msg-id 20550.1267071777@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PostgreSQL-9.0alpha: jade required?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: PostgreSQL-9.0alpha: jade required?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-bugs
I wrote:
> That doesn't in itself explain a problem with building from the
> alpha tarball though.  Is it possible there's a clock skew problem
> in the tarball's file timestamps?

I poked around in the alpha4 tarball and didn't find clock skew.
What I found out was that there's some fundamental fuzzy thinking
in the new docs build process:

* install-html depends on html depends on $(GENERATED_SGML)

* $(GENERATED_SGML) is removed by make clean, therefore also by
make distclean

Ergo, this type of failure is *guaranteed* when trying to build
from a distribution tarball.  This needs to be rethought.

It might be sufficient to not clean $(GENERATED_SGML) except in
make maintainer-clean, but I'm not convinced that's a nice solution.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: New PL/Perl failure with Safe 2.2x due to recursion (8.x & 9.0)
Next
From: Alex Hunsaker
Date:
Subject: Re: New PL/Perl failure with Safe 2.2x due to recursion (8.x & 9.0)