On Mon, Jul 7, 2025 at 5:41 AM Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
> It seems CFBot is using these patches [1], resharing actual patch [2]
> with the hopes that it will be used by CFBot.
Whoops, thanks for reposting that. I plan to get this pushed today so
that it doesn't start blocking the Meson work.
--J
Hi,
On Wed, 25 Jun 2025 at 13:45, Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2025 at 23:46, Jacob Champion
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 1:27 AM Nazir Bilal Yavuz
> > wrote:
> > > I think this is a good idea. Another point is that CI images and their
> > > packages are upda
Hi,
On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 at 17:45, Jacob Champion
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 3:46 AM Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
> > I wanted to experiment with it.
>
> That was fast, thank you!
>
> > First, I got the current list of
> > features from upstream, then disabled the auto features, then
> > expl
On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 3:46 AM Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
> I wanted to experiment with it.
That was fast, thank you!
> First, I got the current list of
> features from upstream, then disabled the auto features, then
> explicitly enabled these features. I did this only for FreeBSD to show
> my id
On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 2:03 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> I confirm Jacob's result that our meson.build fails to think
> that is available, so we do need to do something.
(To clarify for other readers: it's the OAuth feature test I added
that fails. The existing test for HAVE_SYS_EVENT_H is working fine
Hi,
On Tue, 24 Jun 2025 at 23:46, Jacob Champion
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 1:27 AM Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
> > I think this is a good idea. Another point is that CI images and their
> > packages are updated automatically, so it would be easier to catch if
> > something breaks when the
On 24.06.25 22:39, Jacob Champion wrote:
On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 1:29 PM Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Note that Autoconf uses a compilation test, not a preprocessor test, for
its AC_CHECK_HEADERS, so it uses .check_header() semantics. And this
was the result of a long transition, because the compil
On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 1:27 AM Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
> I think this is a good idea. Another point is that CI images and their
> packages are updated automatically, so it would be easier to catch if
> something breaks when the VM is updated.
Yes, that's a great point too. Okay, sounds like the
Jacob Champion writes:
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 2:50 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> Can't say that I find this to be impressive software engineering:
>> rather than having only one probe failure mode to worry about,
>> we have two, depending on whether the compiler knows __has_include().
>> Pretty close
On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 2:50 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Can't say that I find this to be impressive software engineering:
> rather than having only one probe failure mode to worry about,
> we have two, depending on whether the compiler knows __has_include().
> Pretty close to the worst of all possible w
Jacob Champion writes:
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 2:03 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> I confirm Jacob's result that our meson.build fails to think
>> that is available, so we do need to do something.
> (To clarify for other readers: it's the OAuth feature test I added
> that fails. The existing test for
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> Note that Autoconf uses a compilation test, not a preprocessor test, for
> its AC_CHECK_HEADERS, so it uses .check_header() semantics. And this
> was the result of a long transition, because the compile test was
> ultimately deemed to be better. So in general, I wou
On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 1:29 PM Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Note that Autoconf uses a compilation test, not a preprocessor test, for
> its AC_CHECK_HEADERS, so it uses .check_header() semantics. And this
> was the result of a long transition, because the compile test was
> ultimately deemed to be b
On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 5:19 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> As far as I recall, we've always thought that autoconf's approach
> of "explicitly specify the features you expect to get" is the
> right way to do things. I don't love meson's default you-get-
> whatever-seems-available approach at all, though ma
On 24.06.25 01:36, Jacob Champion wrote:
I noticed that the OpenBSD build in CI wasn't running the libcurl
tests. Turns out the feature test I added in b0635bfda is subtly
broken, because it uses cc.check_header() rather than cc.has_header().
On OpenBSD, apparently, the header can't be compiled
Hi,
On Tue, 24 Jun 2025 at 02:37, Jacob Champion
wrote:
> As a potential follow-up, is there any interest in switching the
> Cirrus Meson setup to explicitly enable the features that we expect to
> test? That would match what we do for Autoconf, I think; it would have
> helped me catch my mistake
Jacob Champion writes:
> As a potential follow-up, is there any interest in switching the
> Cirrus Meson setup to explicitly enable the features that we expect to
> test? That would match what we do for Autoconf, I think; it would have
> helped me catch my mistake earlier.
As far as I recall, we'
Hi all,
I noticed that the OpenBSD build in CI wasn't running the libcurl
tests. Turns out the feature test I added in b0635bfda is subtly
broken, because it uses cc.check_header() rather than cc.has_header().
On OpenBSD, apparently, the header can't be compiled
without including additional prere
18 matches
Mail list logo
