Re: PostgreSQL 9.3 beta breaks some extensions "make install" - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: PostgreSQL 9.3 beta breaks some extensions "make install"
Date
Msg-id 8710.1368567945@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PostgreSQL 9.3 beta breaks some extensions "make install"  (Marti Raudsepp <marti@juffo.org>)
Responses Re: PostgreSQL 9.3 beta breaks some extensions "make install"  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Re: PostgreSQL 9.3 beta breaks some extensions "make install"  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Marti Raudsepp <marti@juffo.org> writes:
> I did a quick and dirty survey of extensions on PGXN and found that
> the install change causes problems for (at least) 22% of extensions
> there. I think it's well worth the time to implement a workaround,
> rather than hassle extension writers.

What's really worrying me about this is that beta1 has been out for
less than 48 hours and we've already found one way in which a lot
of system-provided install scripts vary from the one we provide.
How many more compatibility problems will there be?

We changed to using install-sh unconditionally back in 2001 because
we had too many problems with system-provided scripts that didn't do
what we expected.  I see very little reason to believe that the
compatibility problems have disappeared since then, and in fact this
complaint seems to me to be sufficient to refute that thesis.

I still think we should revert 9db7ccae2000524b72a4052352cbb5407fb53b02.
The argument that the system-provided program might be faster carries
very little weight for me --- "make install" is fast enough already.
It's not worth making a bunch of extension authors jump through hoops,
whether their style was bad or not.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Benedikt Grundmann
Date:
Subject: Re: streaming replication, "frozen snapshot backup on it" and missing relfile (postgres 9.2.3 on xfs + LVM)
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Parallel Sort