Thread: MSVC buildfarm members are all unhappy
... and the build logs don't show any particular reason for it.
What is wrong, and why isn't the buildfarm script capturing a
useful error message?
regards, tom lane
Tom Lane wrote: > ... and the build logs don't show any particular reason for it. > What is wrong, and why isn't the buildfarm script capturing a > useful error message? It's the format change in the makefile for foreign stuff. The line: Could not match in foreign makefile I don't know why it ends up where it does - when I run the build in my VM, it ends up as the last line which makes it stand out properly. I'll take a look at fixing the actual issue. //Magnus
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > ... and the build logs don't show any particular reason for it. > What is wrong, and why isn't the buildfarm script capturing a > useful error message? Looks like this: http://anoncvs.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/backend/foreign/Makefile?rev=1.2 broke Mkvcbuild.pm. The attached patch just comments out the offending code in Mkvcbuild.pm - I assume Peter will be putting the FDW stuff back in 8.5. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Attachment
Dave Page wrote: > On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> ... and the build logs don't show any particular reason for it. >> What is wrong, and why isn't the buildfarm script capturing a >> useful error message? > > Looks like this: > http://anoncvs.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/backend/foreign/Makefile?rev=1.2 > broke Mkvcbuild.pm. The attached patch just comments out the offending > code in Mkvcbuild.pm - I assume Peter will be putting the FDW stuff > back in 8.5. Since we removed it from the general Makefiles, I suggest we actually remove it from the Mkvcbuild.pm file as well. it's still there in the history - just like the general Makefiles. Thoughts? //Magnus
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> Since we removed it from the general Makefiles, I suggest we actually
> remove it from the Mkvcbuild.pm file as well. it's still there in the
> history - just like the general Makefiles.
+1. Comments are not a substitute for having CVS history ...
regards, tom lane
Tom Lane wrote: > Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes: >> Since we removed it from the general Makefiles, I suggest we actually >> remove it from the Mkvcbuild.pm file as well. it's still there in the >> history - just like the general Makefiles. > > +1. Comments are not a substitute for having CVS history ... I've applied a version that does this. Hopefully that'll bring the buildfarm back into green. //Magnus