| From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Extensions User Design |
| Date: | 2009-06-25 17:04:40 |
| Message-ID: | 41D5C9F0-BDB9-4324-98D8-D6B73B0C4662@kineticode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Jun 25, 2009, at 7:16 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The problem is, I think, that the Makefile format is way too
>> flexible.
>
> I think the contrib makefiles are considered to be our standard test
> suite for PGXS. If a 3rd-party makefile is doing anything not
> represented in contrib, it's not guaranteed to work anyway. So I'd
> be plenty satisfied if we just made the existing contrib
> infrastructure
> work for 3rd-party modules.
Is there no platform-independent build system we could take advantage
of?
One reason the Perl community is (very gradually) moving away from
ExtUtils::MakMaker towards Module::Build (pure Perl installer) is to
minimize such issues. I realize that we don't depend on Perl on Unix
platforms, so it wouldn't make sense to use its build system for our
extensions, but perhaps there's something else we could do?
Best,
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Page | 2009-06-25 17:07:12 | Re: Extensions User Design |
| Previous Message | David E. Wheeler | 2009-06-25 17:02:07 | Re: Extensions User Design |