Re: [HACKERS] Time to retire Windows XP buildfarm host?

2016-12-23 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera writes: > Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> ... and miraculously it has fixed itself. > And it failed again today, once. > Today I noticed that it's running gcc 4.5.0. But for the 4.5 branch, > the GCC guys put out a few releases before abandoning it, and there

Re: [HACKERS] Time to retire Windows XP buildfarm host?

2016-12-23 Thread Michael Paquier
On Sat, Dec 24, 2016 at 7:48 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Andrew Dunstan wrote: > >> ... and miraculously it has fixed itself. > > And it failed again today, once. > > Today I noticed that it's running gcc 4.5.0. But for the 4.5 branch, > the GCC guys put out a few

Re: [HACKERS] Time to retire Windows XP buildfarm host?

2016-12-23 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Andrew Dunstan wrote: > ... and miraculously it has fixed itself. And it failed again today, once. Today I noticed that it's running gcc 4.5.0. But for the 4.5 branch, the GCC guys put out a few releases before abandoning it, and there are some compiler segmentation faults fixed in some of

Re: [HACKERS] Time to retire Windows XP buildfarm host?

2016-12-09 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 12/05/2016 11:38 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: On 12/05/2016 11:17 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan writes: Windows XP has been past end of life for quite some time. Nevertheless I have kept my instance running with three buildfarm members: frogmouth, currawong and

Re: [HACKERS] Time to retire Windows XP buildfarm host?

2016-12-05 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > pademelon is a good example. I don't mind keeping that working if Tom > is willing to maintain it, but here's the thing: if a certain > portability "problem" only shows up on machines running 20-year-old > operating systems, how much of a problem is

Re: [HACKERS] Time to retire Windows XP buildfarm host?

2016-12-05 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 11:46 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > I think it might be good to introduce a general formal policy of > de-supporting platforms a year or three after their OS support > ended. I agree. If possible, I'd like it to be more like 3 years than 1 year but that

Re: [HACKERS] Time to retire Windows XP buildfarm host?

2016-12-05 Thread Andres Freund
Hi, On 2016-12-05 10:56:00 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > Windows XP has been past end of life for quite some time. Nevertheless I > have kept my instance running with three buildfarm members: frogmouth, > currawong and brolga. Howeever, a recent commit (apparently fa2fa99, but I'm > not 100%

Re: [HACKERS] Time to retire Windows XP buildfarm host?

2016-12-05 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 12/05/2016 11:17 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan writes: Windows XP has been past end of life for quite some time. Nevertheless I have kept my instance running with three buildfarm members: frogmouth, currawong and brolga. Howeever, a recent commit (apparently

Re: [HACKERS] Time to retire Windows XP buildfarm host?

2016-12-05 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan writes: > Windows XP has been past end of life for quite some time. Nevertheless I > have kept my instance running with three buildfarm members: frogmouth, > currawong and brolga. Howeever, a recent commit (apparently fa2fa99, but > I'm not 100% sure)