From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> |
Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Juan José Santamaría Flecha <juanjo(dot)santamaria(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Bump MIN_WINNT to 0x0600 (Vista) as minimal runtime in 16~ |
Date: | 2022-08-27 05:35:25 |
Message-ID: | YwmtHRRoA5gQi7lZ@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 06:26:37AM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> If I'm not wrong, there's some lingering comments which could be removed since
> 495ed0ef2.
It seems to me that you are right. I have not thought about looking
at references to NT. Good catches!
> src/bin/pg_ctl/pg_ctl.c: * on NT4. That way, we don't break on NT4.
> src/bin/pg_ctl/pg_ctl.c: * On NT4, or any other system not containing the required functions, will
> src/bin/pg_ctl/pg_ctl.c: * NT4 doesn't have CreateRestrictedToken, so just call ordinary
> src/port/dirmod.c: * Win32 (NT4 and newer).
> src/backend/port/win32/socket.c: /* No error, zero bytes (win2000+) or error+WSAEWOULDBLOCK (<=nt4) */
There is also a reference to Nt4 in win32.c, for a comment that is
irrelevant now, so it can be IMO removed.
There may be a point in enforcing CreateProcess() if
CreateRestrictedToken() cannot be loaded, but that would be a security
issue if Windows goes crazy as we should always expect the function,
so this had better return an error.
So, what do you think about the attached?
--
Michael
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
win32-more-cleanup.patch | text/x-diff | 3.3 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | John Naylor | 2022-08-27 05:53:24 | Re: windows cfbot failing: my_perl |
Previous Message | John Naylor | 2022-08-27 04:20:29 | Re: windows cfbot failing: my_perl |