Re: ABI Compliance Checker GSoC Project - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dean Rasheed
Subject Re: ABI Compliance Checker GSoC Project
Date
Msg-id CAEZATCW+acBq6rV6vQ+9Pr+NyjaGaiS9Kg3twzDY8vQXQ_xTtA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: ABI Compliance Checker GSoC Project  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: ABI Compliance Checker GSoC Project
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, 25 Jan 2026 at 00:57, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> "David E. Wheeler" <david@justatheory.com> writes:
> > On Jan 24, 2026, at 18:37, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> >> In [1] Dean said he's expects to have to push an amendment to
> >> .abi-compliance-history soon. But then the discussion got a bit derailed
> >> because one of the complaints being reported is bogus, as the struct is only
> >> defined in a .c file.
>
> > Cool, hopefully we’re back on track then.
>
> But the report you pointed to is complaining about both structs,
> which I'd not expect to happen if you installed that patch I
> proposed.
>

Yes, the most recent check on baza [1] is still incorrectly
complaining about both structs.

I have prepared a patch for .abi-compliance-history, but I'll hold off
on pushing it.

Regards,
Dean

[1] https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=baza&dt=2026-01-25%2003%3A22%3A35



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_stat_statements: add missing tests for nesting_level
Next
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Re: Fix a reference error for window functions: In the function 'find_window_functions', the deduplication logic should be removed