Re: [HACKERS] Valid ports for v6.3
От | Thomas A. Szybist |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Valid ports for v6.3 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 199802142049.PAA09557@carmina.boxhill обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Valid ports for v6.3 ("Thomas G. Lockhart" <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
In message <34E5CE64.BA99E3D0@alumni.caltech.edu>, "Thomas G. Lockhart" writes: > Here is my current list for porting status for the v6.3 release. I may > have missed at least a few reports, e.g hpux, irix?? > > Since the porting support has changed for v6.3, if a system is not > tested it should be assumed to be broken. Any regression test done since > Feb 1 will count as "confirmed working", as long as the test ran to > completion and for the most part behaved properly. > > Any machine which does not get an installation and a regression test for > v6.3beta will move to the unsupported list. Also, let us know if you > have an interest in a port even though you cannot actually do the work > to confirm it; that may encourage someone else to volunteer. > > Marc/Bruce, can you help me clarify the bsdi/freebsd/netbsd/bsdxxx > entries? I'm not sure which are unique and what the names should be... > > - Tom > > * aix/4.1.4.0-4.2 - confirmed working when built on 4.1.4.0 (Darren > King) > _ aix/3.5 - not yet tested? close enough to 4.1 to count?? (Frank > Dana?) > _ bsdi > _ FreeBSD/2.2.1,2.2.5 - in progress (Tatsuo) > ? NetBSD/i386 version? - not yet tested but should work? > x NetBSD/m68k Amiga, HP300, Mac - not yet working... (Henry Hotz) > * NetBSD/sparc version? confirmed working (Tom Helbekkmo) > * NetBSD/vax version? confirmed working (Tom Helbekkmo) > * dgux/5.4R4.11 - patches submitted (Brian Gallew) > _ hpux/9.0.x > _ hpux/10.20 > _ irix5 > _ irix6/MIPS > _ dec/alpha - currently broken? confirmed working on v6.2.1 (Pedro) > _ linux/alpha - currently broken? > * linux/i386 - confirmed working (Thomas) > ? linux/i386/glibc2 - minor library breakage; in progress (Oliver) > _ mklinux/ppc - in progress (Tatsuo) > _ nextstep - worked with patches on v1.0.9; not working now? > _ sco/i386 > _ solaris/i386 - confirmed working (Marc) > * solaris/sparc/2.5.1 - confirmed working (Marc) > _ solaris/sparc/2.6 - in progress (Tatsuo) > _ sunos/sparc/4.1.4 - in progress (Tatsuo) > _ svr4/MIPS - dcosx and sinix/seimens-nixdorf worked on v6.1 (Frank > Ridderbusch?) > _ ultrix4 - no recent reports? obsolete port?? > x univel - not working now; in progress? (Billy G. Allie) > > I don't see linux/sparc here. The last snapshot I tried was from 2/6. That ran well. I just grapped today's (2/14) snapshot and will try that, and let you know. I'm using 2.0.29 kernel. One issue I've heard of is that _SC_OPEN_MAX is used in backend/storage/file/fd.c. I later kernels, /usr/include/asm/unistd.h was changed. _SC_OPEN_MAX has #ifdef __KERNEL__ around it. 2.0.29 doesn't have the #ifdef, so I don't have this issue. I'm not what the correct fix should be. Tom Szybist szybist@boxhill.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: