On 07.09.26 20:39, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]> writes:
On 03.09.26 15:52, Tom Lane wrote:
But I concur with Andreas that 0005 looks a bit half-baked.
Maybe that's the right amount of effort for the back branches,
but something else should happen in HEAD.
Right. Here is another patch at the end (0006) that I propose for
master only that makes using unsupported options an error. Some
Windows-only options already behaved that way, so this just makes the
rest consistent.
With that addition, this looks fine to me.
This has been committed and backpatched. There were a few more issues
of this kind in the backbranches, which I have also fixed.
