On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 04:51:03PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes: > Yeah, very long ago. A quick search of our archives shows that the number > of mentions of Borland pretty much fell off a cliff after 2009 (excluding > the repeated conversations about dropping support, that is). I found one > report suggesting that it was already broken in 2012: > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/AD61A3A7C80949178643FE5D2811C35F%40LynnPC > > It seems pretty safe to say that nobody's using this build method > anymore. As best I can tell from perusing the archives, the reason > we used to expend a lot of sweat on it was that there was a freely > available version of Borland C and none of MSVC. But that stopped > being true a long time ago, so there's not much reason to concern > ourselves with it anymore.
Agreed, I was just pointing out why it remained so long. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
