[PATCH] allow src/tools/msvc/clean.bat script to be called from the root of the source tree
In [1]/messages/by-id/2b7a674b-5fb0-d264-75ef-ecc7a31e54f8@postgrespro.ru capacity for $SUBJECT was added to most of the batch scripts, but
clean.bat was not included. I propose to do so with the attached patch.
By the way, are pgbison.bat and pgflex.bat directly called anywhere?
[1]: /messages/by-id/2b7a674b-5fb0-d264-75ef-ecc7a31e54f8@postgrespro.ru
/messages/by-id/2b7a674b-5fb0-d264-75ef-ecc7a31e54f8@postgrespro.ru
Regards,
Juan José Santamaría Flecha
Attachments:
0001-msvc-clean-bat-path-fix.patchapplication/octet-stream; name=0001-msvc-clean-bat-path-fix.patchDownload+4-1
On 1/18/22 04:41, Juan José Santamaría Flecha wrote:
In [1] capacity for $SUBJECT was added to most of the batch scripts,
but clean.bat was not included. I propose to do so with the attached
patch.
That looks a bit ugly. How about this (untested) instead?
By the way, are pgbison.bat and pgflex.bat directly called anywhere?
Not to my knowledge. One of the things that's annoying about them is
that the processor names are hardcoded, so if you install winflexbison
as I usually do you have to rename the executables (or rename the
chocolatey shims) or the scripts won't work.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
Attachments:
clean-from-anywhere.patchtext/x-patch; charset=UTF-8; name=clean-from-anywhere.patchDownload+4-3
On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 5:49 PM Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
On 1/18/22 04:41, Juan José Santamaría Flecha wrote:
In [1] capacity for $SUBJECT was added to most of the batch scripts,
but clean.bat was not included. I propose to do so with the attached
patch.That looks a bit ugly. How about this (untested) instead?
It is WFM, so I am fine with it.
By the way, are pgbison.bat and pgflex.bat directly called anywhere?
Not to my knowledge. One of the things that's annoying about them is
that the processor names are hardcoded, so if you install winflexbison
as I usually do you have to rename the executables (or rename the
chocolatey shims) or the scripts won't work.We could use those batches to get to the hardcoded name, but that would
probably be as annoying as renaming. If those batches serve no purpose
right now, it should be fine to remove them from the tree. I use the
executables from a MinGW installation, and they keep their actual name.
Regards,
Juan José Santamaría Flecha
On 1/18/22 15:08, Juan José Santamaría Flecha wrote:
By the way, are pgbison.bat and pgflex.bat directly called anywhere?
Not to my knowledge. One of the things that's annoying about them is
that the processor names are hardcoded, so if you install winflexbison
as I usually do you have to rename the executables (or rename the
chocolatey shims) or the scripts won't work.We could use those batches to get to the hardcoded name, but that
would probably be as annoying as renaming. If those batches serve no
purpose right now, it should be fine to remove them from the tree. I
use the executables from a MinGW installation, and they keep their
actual name.
OK, but I don't think we should require installation of MinGW for an
MSVC build.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan