On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 9:56 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes: >> Very good point. I have modified the patch to add this block in all >> cases where it was missing. I started to wonder about the comment and >> if the Mingw fix was released. Based on some research, I see this as >> fixed in mingw-runtime-3.2, released 2003-10-10. That's pretty old. > > Yeah. I would vote for removing that code in all branches. There is no > reason to suppose somebody is going to install 8.4.22 on a machine that > they haven't updated mingw on since 2003. Or, if you prefer, just remove > it in HEAD --- but going around and *adding* more copies seems like > make-work. The fact that we've not heard complaints about the omissions > is good evidence that nobody's using the buggy mingw versions anymore.
I don't think it is. Right now we're not checking errno *at all* in a bunch of these places, so we're sure not going to get complaints about doing it incorrectly in those places. Or do I need more caffeine? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers