Re: support for POSIX 1003.1-2001 hosts
От | Dominic J. Eidson |
---|---|
Тема | Re: support for POSIX 1003.1-2001 hosts |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.33.0203111753530.31707-100000@morannon.the-infinite.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: support for POSIX 1003.1-2001 hosts (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: support for POSIX 1003.1-2001 hosts
|
Список | pgsql-patches |
On Mon, 11 Mar 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Paul Eggert wrote: > > > From: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> > > > Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 12:05:17 -0500 (EST) > > > > > > This is an interesting patch, but have not heard anyone else have this > > > problem > > > > That's not surprising, since I am purposely running a bleeding-edge > > system to test PostgreSQL portability. Nobody is shipping POSIX > > 1003.1-2001 systems yet (the standard was only approved in December by > > the IEEE, and it will not be an official ISO standard for a few more > > weeks yet). But when they do, you will run into this problem. > > > > > > > and am hesitant to add more cost to fix something that may not be > > > broken. Sorry. Apparently it _is_ broken - Paul wouldn't be submitting a patch if it wasn't. Duh. > > There is no cost to PostgreSQL in normal operation, since that part of > > the source isn't affected at all. All that is affected is some of the > > test scripts and documentation. I see little risk to incorporating > > the patch, but of course it's your decision. > > We are kind of picky about adding complexity when it isn't required. s/isn't/isn't yet ^^^ So you'd prefer to just wait 'till POSIX 1003.1-2001 systems ship? <sarcasm> Paul, I guess you should set up an at(1) job to resubmit the patch in a couple-3 years, or something... </sarcasm> -- Dominic J. Eidson "Baruk Khazad! Khazad ai-menu!" - Gimli ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.the-infinite.org/ http://www.the-infinite.org/~dominic/
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: