Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage

On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 8:36 PM Peter Eisentraut
<peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On 15.08.22 03:48, Thomas Munro wrote:
> >> I vaguely remember successfully trying it in the past. But I just tried it
> >> unsuccessfully in a VM and there's a bunch of other places saying it's not
> >> working...
> >> https://github.com/microsoft/WSL/issues/4240
> > I think we'd better remove our claim that it works then.  Patch attached.
>
> When I developed support for abstract unix sockets, I did test them on
> Windows.  The lack of support on WSL appears to be an unrelated fact.
> See for example how [0] talks about them separately.

User amoldeshpande's complaint was posted to the WSL project's issue
tracker but it's about native Windows/winsock code and s/he says so
explicitly (though other people pile in with various other complaints
including WSL interop).  User sunilmut's comment says it's not
working, and [0] is now just confusing everybody :-(