| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage |
| Date: | 2022-08-07 02:58:12 |
| Message-ID: | 182602.1659841092@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2022-08-07 11:47:31 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
>> So what about strtof? That's gotta be dead code too. I gather we
>> still need commit 72880ac1's HAVE_BUGGY_STRTOF.
> Well, right now we don't refuse to build against the "wrong" runtimes, so it's
> hard to say whether you're looking at the right runtime. I don't think we need
> this if we're (as we should imo) only using the ucrt - that's microsoft's,
> which IIUC is ok?
You could pull it out and see if the buildfarm breaks, but my money
is on it breaking. That HAVE_BUGGY_STRTOF stuff isn't very old.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2022-08-07 03:12:54 | Re: failing to build preproc.c on solaris with sun studio |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2022-08-07 02:57:22 | Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage |