From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Devrim Gündüz <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: drop support for Python 2.3 |
Date: | 2017-02-19 18:48:11 |
Message-ID: | 24334.1487530091@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Devrim =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=FCnd=FCz?= <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org> writes:
> On Sun, 2017-02-19 at 10:42 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Relevant question: what version of tcl is installed on those?
> 8.4.13 is installed.
Hmph. I can't see any relevant-looking source changes between 8.4.13
and 8.4.15, which I have laying about here and which works fine.
I wonder if Red Hat is carrying some distro-specific patch that
breaks this case? Or conceivably it's timezone dependent?
Anyway, my inclination is just to tweak that test a bit so it doesn't
trip over the problem. The point of the test is mainly to see if the
[clock] command works at all, not to exercise any specific parameter
choices. Would you check whether this:
$ tclsh
% clock format [clock scan "1/26/2010"] -format "%U"
gives the expected result "04" on that machine?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Devrim Gündüz | 2017-02-19 20:10:29 | Re: drop support for Python 2.3 |
Previous Message | Devrim Gündüz | 2017-02-19 18:09:08 | Re: drop support for Python 2.3 |