On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 12:59:26PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
>> > On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 12:35:02PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> >> If we're willing to allow 9.4.6 to install different files than 9.4.5
>> >> does, I don't see why it's a problem for 9.5.1. But having said that,
>> >> I agree that this seems pretty low-risk, and so IMO we might as well
>> >> ship it sooner not later.
>>
>> > Well, as I said, I can't test the patch, which made me lean toward
>> > 9.5.1.
>>
>> That's what the buildfarm is for ... but ...
>>
>> I would have been fine with you pushing this yesterday, but now it's
>> too late to get a buildfarm cycle on it. Please hold for 9.5.1.
>
> Oh, I forgot about the buildfarm testing. Good point. OK, hold for
> 9.5.1.
The patch would put the buildfarm in red as it is incomplete anyway,
with MSVC what is used instead of dynloader.h is
port/dynloader/win32.h. Instead of this patch I would be incline to
remove the #define stuff with dynloader.h that use WIN32_ONLY_COMPILER
(see for example dfmgr.c) and just copy the header in include/. This
way we use the same header for all platforms.
--
Michael
