Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage
От | Thomas Munro |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+hUKGJ6HmjEE2KuGtnhprt2KUpz6n-uZrvWsLTSzfYKt8O0Ww@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 1:55 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > John Naylor <john.naylor@enterprisedb.com> writes: > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 3:11 PM Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar.ahmad@gmail.com> wrote: > >> The patch does not apply successfully; please rebase the patch. > > > There's a good reason for that -- the latest one was committed two > > weeks ago. The status should still be waiting on author, though, > > namely for: > > > On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 5:28 AM Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Remaining things from this thread: > >> * removing --disable-thread-safety > >> * removing those vestigial HAVE_XXX macros (one by one analysis and patches) > >> * making Unix sockets secure for Windows in tests > > I imagine we should just close the current CF entry as committed. > There's no patch in existence for any of those TODO items, and > I didn't think one was imminent. I have patches for these, but not quite ready to post. I'll mark this entry closed, and make a new one or two when ready, instead of this one-gigantic-CF-entry-that-goes-on-forever format.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: