On 2019-Jan-22, Andres Freund wrote: > I think its plain wrong to add COPT to CXXFLAGS. Re PROFILE I'm on the > fence. I personally think the pgxs stuff is a bit separate, and I'm > doubtful we ought to backpatch that. I'm basically planning to apply > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20190107091734.GA1582%40msg.credativ.de > to 11-, minus the PGXS stuff. If we want that, we ought to apply it to > master only IMO.
I don't understand why you don't want to backpatch the PGXS bits. Is there something working today that would be broken by it? I think you're worried about places that invoke makefiles with PG_CXXFLAGS set and expecting the value not to be propagated. Is that a scenario we need to worry about? The patch neglects to update extend.sgml with the new pgxs variable, though. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
