Re: libpq's pollution of application namespace
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: libpq's pollution of application namespace |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 10124.1129570948@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: libpq's pollution of application namespace (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> (I'm already desperately unhappy about the thin representation of >> non-GNU toolchains in the build farm...) > Me too. If you provide a list of the most important platforms/toolsets > missing I will see if I can talk some people into donating resources. Well, one way to attack it is to look at the current supported-platforms list and try to get buildfarm representation for everything not covered already. http://developer.postgresql.org/docs/postgres/supported-platforms.html I don't think we need more buildfarms running more random distros of Linux ;-) --- unless they are running non-gcc compilers. People should be encouraged to test with non-gcc compilers if they have any available. We seem to be short on buildfarm representation for AIX, HPUX, Solaris (particularly older variants), Tru64; it'd be nice to cover all the hardware platforms each of these runs on. For that matter, we're a bit thin on the unusual-hardware ports of the *BSDen. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: