pg_config_h.in not up-to-date

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

pg_config_h.in not up-to-date

Antonin Houska-2
When I run "autoreconf" on the master branch, git generates the diff
below. Shouldn't it just be applied? I suppose someone changed configure.ac
and forgot to update the generated file.

--
Antonin Houska
Web: https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com


pg_config_h.in.diff (484 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: pg_config_h.in not up-to-date

Tom Lane-2
Antonin Houska <[hidden email]> writes:
> When I run "autoreconf" on the master branch, git generates the diff
> below. Shouldn't it just be applied? I suppose someone changed configure.ac
> and forgot to update the generated file.

Yeah, looks like fe61df7f8 is at fault.  Michael?

                        regards, tom lane


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: pg_config_h.in not up-to-date

Michael Paquier-2
On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 01:42:38AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Antonin Houska <[hidden email]> writes:
>> When I run "autoreconf" on the master branch, git generates the diff
>> below. Shouldn't it just be applied? I suppose someone changed configure.ac
>> and forgot to update the generated file.
>
> Yeah, looks like fe61df7f8 is at fault.  Michael?

Indeed, thanks.  It looks like a "git add" that was fat-fingered.  I
would like to make things more consistent with the attached.
Thoughts?
--
Michael

openssl-autoconf.patch (1K) Download Attachment
signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: pg_config_h.in not up-to-date

Tom Lane-2
Michael Paquier <[hidden email]> writes:
> Indeed, thanks.  It looks like a "git add" that was fat-fingered.  I
> would like to make things more consistent with the attached.

+1, but I think the first period in this comment is redundant:

+  AC_DEFINE([USE_OPENSSL], 1, [Define to 1 to build with OpenSSL support. (--with-ssl=openssl).])

                        regards, tom lane


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: pg_config_h.in not up-to-date

Michael Paquier-2
On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 02:21:21AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier <[hidden email]> writes:
> > Indeed, thanks.  It looks like a "git add" that was fat-fingered.  I
> > would like to make things more consistent with the attached.
>
> +1, but I think the first period in this comment is redundant:
>
> +  AC_DEFINE([USE_OPENSSL], 1, [Define to 1 to build with OpenSSL support. (--with-ssl=openssl).])

I guess that you mean the second period here to be more consistent
with the others?  That would mean the following diff:
+  AC_DEFINE([USE_OPENSSL], 1, [Define to 1 to build with OpenSSL support. (--with-ssl=openssl)])
--
Michael

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: pg_config_h.in not up-to-date

Tom Lane-2
Michael Paquier <[hidden email]> writes:
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 02:21:21AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> +1, but I think the first period in this comment is redundant:
>> +  AC_DEFINE([USE_OPENSSL], 1, [Define to 1 to build with OpenSSL support. (--with-ssl=openssl).])

> I guess that you mean the second period here to be more consistent
> with the others?  That would mean the following diff:
> +  AC_DEFINE([USE_OPENSSL], 1, [Define to 1 to build with OpenSSL support. (--with-ssl=openssl)])

Hm.  It should be consistent with the rest, for sure.  Personally I'd put
the only period at the end, but I suppose we should stick with the
prevailing style if there is one.

                        regards, tom lane


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: pg_config_h.in not up-to-date

Michael Paquier-2
On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 09:57:22AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Hm.  It should be consistent with the rest, for sure.  Personally I'd put
> the only period at the end, but I suppose we should stick with the
> prevailing style if there is one.

Thanks.  I have just used the same style as XML, LDAP and LLVM then.
Thanks Antonin for the report.
--
Michael

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment