should Makefile.custom be in source tree or in build tree?

Excerpts from Peter Eisentraut's message of mar dic 06 16:06:57 -0300 2011:

Makefile.custom is currently looked for in the source directory. This
tripped me up recently when doing a vpath build. Should it be looked
for in the build tree instead? Or both?

Hmm, interesting question. When I have used it, I put it in the source
dir without thinking much about it. In the builddir it'd be painful I
think because it'd be gone when the builddir is zapped to do a full
rebuild (I don't do this often but it does happen from time to time).

Nowadays I don't use it much though, since I learned the PROFILE trick
when calling make, so it's not like I care all that much.

--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:

Excerpts from Peter Eisentraut's message of mar dic 06 16:06:57 -0300 2011:

Makefile.custom is currently looked for in the source directory. This
tripped me up recently when doing a vpath build. Should it be looked
for in the build tree instead? Or both?

Hmm, interesting question. When I have used it, I put it in the source
dir without thinking much about it. In the builddir it'd be painful I
think because it'd be gone when the builddir is zapped to do a full
rebuild (I don't do this often but it does happen from time to time).

Yeah, to the extent that I use vpath builds at all, it's with the
expectation that I can rm -rf the build tree and not lose anything
interesting. So I'd be sad if the ability to keep Makefile.custom
in the source tree disappeared.

However, I have no objection to looking first in the build tree and
second in the source tree, if you can get it to do that easily.

regards, tom lane