On Jan 6, 2010, at 5:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > I went with 5.8 as the cutoff, for a couple of reasons: we're not in > the business of telling people they ought to be up-to-date, but only of > rejecting versions that demonstrably fail badly; and I found out that > older versions of awk are not sufficiently competent with && and || to > code a more complex test properly :-(. A version check that doesn't > actually do what it claims to is worse than useless, and old buggy awk > is exactly what you'd expect to find on a box with old buggy perl.
Yes, but even a buggy old Perl is quite competent with && and ||. Why use awk to test the version of Perl when you have this other nice utility to do the job? > (It's also worth noting that the perl version seen at configure time > is not necessarily that seen at runtime, anyway, so there's not a lot > of point in getting too finicky here.) Fair enough. Best, David -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
