Re: [RFC] building postgres with meson - v13 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: [RFC] building postgres with meson - v13
Date
Msg-id 28de92b5-a514-fe1b-1637-ba228aa2cccf@enterprisedb.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [RFC] building postgres with meson - v13  (samay sharma <smilingsamay@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 03.10.22 09:39, samay sharma wrote:
>     9f5be26c1215 meson: Add docs for building with meson
> 
>     I do like the overall layout of this.
> 
>     The "Supported Platforms" section should be moved back to near the end
>     of the chapter.  I don't see a reason to move it forward, at least
>     none that is related to the meson issue.
> 
> 
> Agreed that it's unrelated to meson. However, I think it's better to 
> move it in the front as it's generally useful to know if your platform 
> is supported before you start performing the installation steps and get 
> stuck somewhere.

The way it is currently organized is that 17.2 says

"In general, a modern Unix-compatible platform should be able to run 
PostgreSQL. The platforms that had received specific testing at the time 
of release are described in Section 17.6 below."

So basically, it says, don't worry about it, your platform is probably 
supported, but check below if you are interested in the details.

I don't see a reason to turn this around.

> 
> Do you think I should submit that as a separate commit in the same 
> patch-set or just move it out to a completely different patch submission?
> 
> 
>     The changes to the "Getting the Source" section are also not
>     appropriate for this patch.
> 
> 
> Given that many developers are now using Git for downloading the source 
> code, I think it makes sense to be in the Getting the source section. 
> Also, meson today doesn't cleanly build via the tarballs. Hence, I added 
> it to the section (and patchset).

Section 17.3 already contains a link to section I.1 about using Git.

> Do you think I should move this to a different patch?

If you wanted to pursue these changes, then yes, but I think they are 
not clear improvements, as mentioned above.

I suggest focusing on getting the actual meson documentation finished 
and then considering polishing the overall flow if desired.




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Can we avoid chdir'ing in resolve_symlinks() ?
Next
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum