Обсуждение: 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

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