Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> I am fine with removing things, but I do remember one reason the Borland
> part was kept is that some tool would only work with the
> Borland-compiled library, not gcc or MSVC, but that was long ago.
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.
regards, tom lane
