This repository has been archived by the owner. It is now read-only.

postgresql: adding --universal support. #17611

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into
from

Conversation

Projects
None yet
2 participants
Contributor

mrjbq7 commented Feb 5, 2013

This adds --universal support to the postgresql formula.

This applies a post-configure patch to fix headers created in the configure process, changing lines such as:

/* The normal alignment of `double', in bytes. */
#define ALIGNOF_DOUBLE 8

To lines like this:

/* The normal alignment of `double', in bytes. */
#ifdef __LP64__
#define ALIGNOF_DOUBLE 8
#else
#define ALIGNOF_DOUBLE 4
#endif

This uses the same approach used by MacPorts, but instead of applying an ed script, uses ruby to make the string substitutions.

For more background information, see the related requests and discussions for this feature: #1325, #14032, #14036, #14111, #14616, and #14775.

Owner

MikeMcQuaid commented Feb 6, 2013

Sheesh, how many times do we have to have this discussion? The problem isn't the patch, the problem is that postgresql upstream won't support this so we won't either. Go and repeatedly file issues on their bug tracker. You may break things in postgresql through this patch will which annoy a) our users and b) upstream. Maintain your own tap or fork with this!

If another maintainer feels strongly about including this feel free to reopen.

@MikeMcQuaid MikeMcQuaid closed this Feb 6, 2013

Contributor

mrjbq7 commented Feb 6, 2013

Let me just say that at least three of your users have asked for this, and filed issues to request this, as early as 3 years ago!

Also, this patch is stable and has worked for MacPorts for 3 years with only one minor change for Postgres 9.2.

Also, this patch is opt-in, so only users that explicitly want universal will use it, limiting the surface area.

Also, you have said numerous times that you don't see the need for 32-bit, don't see the need for universal, don't care about universal, would prefer it to go away, and yet are the only one closing these pull requests. Perhaps @adamv and @jacknagel could weigh in...

But more to the point I want to make, you said five days ago, "Closing until at least the [use of curl] is fixed." and have the nerve to get pissed off at me when I make your requested fix and resubmit???

I'm very thankful for your effort on this project (and pending brew-test-bot), and you are obviously welcome to be a Nazi about this, but I think it is very unfriendly to suggest I resubmit and then say "Sheesh, how many times do we have to have this discussion?". At least have the decency to say, thank you for cleaning up your patch, before saying, f--k you I don't really care.

Owner

MikeMcQuaid commented Feb 6, 2013

Thank you for cleaning up your patch. I suggest you move it to a fork or tap and I'm happy to help you do that. I'm sorry for being unfriendly I would just rather we didn't spend more time on this issue. If another maintainer reopens this that's up to them and we'll have a discussion.

Again, given that we have taps and fork support and upstream are the real problem here (if you still don't understand why I'll explain to you further but I suspect you'll disagree).

@xu-cheng xu-cheng locked and limited conversation to collaborators Feb 16, 2016

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.