Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 12:03:44AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>> I don't like adding code to support every configuration that someone
>>> dreamed up but no one actually needs.
>>
>> Hmm, isn't this exactly what configure is for?
> Configure is for such tests --- you are right, and we already test two
> places.
I have to side with Ross also. Configure makes many tests that are
designed for situations much less common than his. I don't see
the reason for refusing to accommodate this one.
(Not that I've looked at the details of the patch, mind you. But in
principle it seems reasonable.)
regards, tom lane
