Re: Regression tests fail with musl libc because libpq.so can't be loaded
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
To: PostgreSQL Bugs <pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2024-03-21T23:23:45Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs, pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Allow "make check"-style testing to work with musl C library.
- d82605bcd666 14.12 landed
- 8a92b70c11ba 17.0 landed
- 7651fd387697 16.3 landed
- 7124e7d528a8 12.19 landed
- 3c3f4fd741d0 15.7 landed
- 243e9953281f 13.15 landed
-
Fix compiler warnings on MSYS2
- 8c6d30f21139 13.0 cited
On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 7:02 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes: > > Just a thought: if we want to go this way, do we need a new exec call? > > We already control the initial exec in pg_ctl.c. > > I'm resistant to assuming the postmaster is launched through pg_ctl. > systemd, for example, might well prefer not to do that, not to > mention all the troglodytes still using 1990s launch scripts. > > A question that seems worth debating in this thread is how much > updating the process title is even worth nowadays. It feels like > a hangover from before we had pg_stat_activity and other monitoring > support. So I don't feel a huge need to support it on musl. > The previously-suggested patch to whitelist glibc and variants, > and otherwise fall back to PS_USE_NONE, seems like it might be > the appropriate amount of effort. > > > +1 cheers andrew