On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> writes: >> On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 1:03 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> I think we should give serious consideration to desupporting this >>> combination so that we can get rid of the plague of PGDLLIMPORT >>> marks. > >> No objection here - though I should point out that it's not been >> offline for a long time (aside from a couple of weeks in January) - >> it's been happily building most pre-9.2 branches for ages. 9.1 seems >> to be stuck, along with HEAD, and I forgot to add 9.3. I'm in the >> process of cleaning that up as time allows, but am happy to drop it >> instead if we no longer want to support anything that old. We >> certainly don't use anything resembling that config for the EDB >> installer builds. > > Further discussion pointed out that currawong, for example, seems to > want PGDLLIMPORT markings but is able to get by without them in > some cases that narwhal evidently doesn't like. So at this point, > desupporting narwhal's configuration is clearly premature --- we > should instead be looking into exactly what is causing the different > cases to fail or not fail. > > I still have hopes that we might be able to get rid of PGDLLIMPORT > marks, but by actually understanding why they seem to be needed in > some cases and not others, not by just arbitrarily dropping support. > > In the meantime, please do get HEAD running again on that machine.
Done: http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=narwhal&dt=2014-02-03%2009%3A26%3A43 It's not happy though :-( -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers