Re: Time to upgrade buildfarm coverage for some EOL'd OSes? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas Munro
Subject Re: Time to upgrade buildfarm coverage for some EOL'd OSes?
Date
Msg-id CA+hUKG+nMGP3ye6H+w8nY_zEnhQ7td6pVh23wnZCcEgT+Fx7CA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Time to upgrade buildfarm coverage for some EOL'd OSes?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 11:40 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes:
> > (Hmm, in hindsight, I don't know why we need "--with-bsd-auth" instead
> > of detecting it, but I don't plan to work on that...)
>
> As far as that goes, I thought we had a policy against auto-detecting
> user-visible features.  From memory, the rationale goes like "if you
> want feature X you should say so, so that the build will fail if we
> can't provide it".  Thus we make you say something like --with-openssl
> even though it wouldn't be particularly hard to auto-detect.  Peter E.
> can probably advocate more strongly for this approach.

Oh, I see.  I was thinking that operating system features were a bit
different from "external packages" (the purpose of --with according to
the autoconf docs), but that's a bit fuzzy and I see now that it's
consistent with our treatment of PAM which is very similar.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Matthias van de Meent
Date:
Subject: Re: Map WAL segment files on PMEM as WAL buffers
Next
From: Kyotaro Horiguchi
Date:
Subject: Re: Question about client_connection_check_interval