Re: how to handle missing "prove" - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: how to handle missing "prove"
Date
Msg-id 5452D3B7.1040603@gmx.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: how to handle missing "prove"  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Responses Re: how to handle missing "prove"
List pgsql-hackers
On 10/28/14 10:01 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 10/28/14 9:16 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> ISTM that the project policy for external components like this has been
>> "don't rely on them unless user says to use them, in which case fail if
>> they aren't present".  So perhaps what we ought to have is a configure
>> switch along the lines of "--enable-tap-tests".  If you don't specify it,
>> prove_check expands to nothing.  If you do specify it, we fail if we
>> lack any of the expected support, both "prove" and whatever the agreed-on
>> set of Perl modules is.
>
> That's also a good idea.

Here is a patch.



Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: TAP test breakage on MacOS X
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: TAP test breakage on MacOS X