On 2016-11-12 11:42:12 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> > On 2016-11-12 11:30:42 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> which is a rather blatant waste of cycles. I would suggest an explicit
> >> do-nothing installcheck rule rather than the hack you came up with here.
>
> > I had that at first, but that generates a warning about overwriting the
> > makefile target - which afaics cannot be fixed.
>
> Hm. What about inventing an additional macro NO_INSTALLCHECK that
> prevents pgxs.mk from generating an installcheck rule?
That'd work. I'd also be ok with living with the warning. I have to say
I find it hard to be concerned about the cycles here. It's not like
anybody complained about make check unconditionally creating a test
installation, even if there's tests in a contrib module...
Andres