On 05.09.21 21:57, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> writes:
>> Makes sense. I think we could do it without hardcoding those library
>> names, as in the attached patch. But it comes out to the same result
>> AFAICT.
>
> This has been pushed, but the CF entry is still open, which is
> making the cfbot unhappy. Were you leaving it open pending
> pushing to back branches as well? I'm not sure what the point
> of waiting is --- the buildfarm isn't going to exercise the
> troublesome scenario.
I noticed another fix that was required and didn't get to it until now.
It's all done and backpatched now. CF entry is closed.
