On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Again, I don't see much harm in the patch you propose, it's more a
>> question of should we contract to support this use-case. It's not
>> zero cost to do so; we might for example be able to get rid of some
>> (in/out)put/*.source files if we didn't need to substitute @abs_builddir@
>> in them. Those things are a PITA to maintain, too, so I'm not very
>> eager to add on more reasons why tests would need them.
>
> I have no clear answer to that either, it depends on where we want
> things to go. Anyway, having both relative and absolute paths in this
> test case is clearly a no-win. I agree that we could definitely remove
> at least most the @abs_builddir@ markups which is used everywhere
> except create_function if we take the direction of minimizing the
> input/output files, but still it seems to me that even if this
> facilitates a bit the life of maintainers, this has as cost a
> reduction of the test portability, and it is not like those files are
> actually modified every day.
Or in short... I would actually fine to just tell my users to cd into
the folder where the input/output/data/sql/expected files are. At then
end let's remove any inconsistency by either:
1) remove completely abs_builddir and abs_srcdir to reduce the number
of input and output files generated.
2) fix largeobject.source to use absolute paths.
Thoughts?
--
Michael
