Re: Windows vs C99 (was Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c)
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Windows vs C99 (was Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | bc329070-e3b4-cc10-1502-818e600a5648@2ndQuadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Windows vs C99 (was Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c) (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: Windows vs C99 (was Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c)
Re: Windows vs C99 (was Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 08/21/2018 01:31 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > Hi, > > On 2018-08-21 13:29:20 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >>> So, does anyone with Windows build experience want to comment on this? >>> The proposal is to desupport anything older than (probably) MSVC 2013, >>> or alternatively anything that cannot compile the attached test file. >> We've got a buildfarm handy that could answer the question. >> Let's just stick a test function in there for a day and see >> which animals fail. > I think we pretty much know the answer already, anything before 2013 > will fail. The question is more whether that's problematic for the > people building on windows. My theory, quoted by Peter upthread, is > that it shouldn't be problematic because 2013 can build binaries that > run on XP etc. > XP at least is essentially a dead platform for us. My animals are not able to build anything after release 10. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: