Thread: Apply PGDLLIMPORT markings to some GUC variables
Hi hackers, I noticed that in commit d3cc5ffe81f6 some GUC variables were moved to header files. According to the commit message in 8ec569479, all variables in header files must be marked with PGDLLIMPORT, am I right? I've made a patch that adds missing PGDLLIMPORTs, please, take a look. -- Best regards, Sofia Kopikova Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
Attachment
On Tue, Aug 13, 2024 at 10:38 AM Sofia Kopikova <s.kopikova@postgrespro.ru> wrote: > I noticed that in commit d3cc5ffe81f6 some GUC variables were moved to > header files. According to the commit message in 8ec569479, all > variables in header files must be marked with PGDLLIMPORT, am I right? > > I've made a patch that adds missing PGDLLIMPORTs, please, take a look. This seems correct to me. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On 13.08.24 21:00, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Aug 13, 2024 at 10:38 AM Sofia Kopikova > <s.kopikova@postgrespro.ru> wrote: >> I noticed that in commit d3cc5ffe81f6 some GUC variables were moved to >> header files. According to the commit message in 8ec569479, all >> variables in header files must be marked with PGDLLIMPORT, am I right? >> >> I've made a patch that adds missing PGDLLIMPORTs, please, take a look. > > This seems correct to me. committed
On 8/14/24 12:50, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 13.08.24 21:00, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 13, 2024 at 10:38 AM Sofia Kopikova >> <s.kopikova@postgrespro.ru> wrote: >>> I noticed that in commit d3cc5ffe81f6 some GUC variables were moved to >>> header files. According to the commit message in 8ec569479, all >>> variables in header files must be marked with PGDLLIMPORT, am I right? >>> >>> I've made a patch that adds missing PGDLLIMPORTs, please, take a look. >> >> This seems correct to me. > > committed > Many thanks for quick review and commit. -- Best regards, Sofia Kopikova Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
On 19.08.24 08:18, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Aug 13, 2024 at 03:00:00PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> This seems correct to me. > > It is not the first time that this happens in recent history. Would > it be worth automating that? I would guess a TAP test that takes a > copy of the headers, applies the changes while filtering the few > exceptions, then compares it to the origin in the tree? Probably worth thinking about, but it would at least require some kind of exclude list, because there are exceptions like src/include/common/ /logging.h.