On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 07:07:17PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> writes:
> > On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 11:38 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >> I think we're hoping that somebody will step up and investigate how
> >> narwhal's problem might be fixed.
I have planned to look at reproducing narwhal's problem once the dust settles
on orangutan, but I wouldn't mind if narwhal went away instead.
> > However, if "fixing" it comes down to upgrading the seriously old
> > compiler and toolchain on that box (which frankly is so obsolete, I
> > can't see why anyone would want to use anything like it these days),
> > then I think the best option is to retire it, and replace it with
> > Windows 2012R2 and a modern release of MinGW/Msys which is far more
> > likely to be similar to what someone would want to use at present.
If you upgrade the toolchain, you really have a new animal.
> No argument here. I would kind of like to have more than zero
> understanding of *why* it's failing, just in case there's more to it
> than "oh, probably a bug in this old toolchain". But finding that out
> might well take significant time, and in the end not tell us anything
> very useful.
Agreed on all those points.
> Is it likely that anyone is still using Windows 2003 in the field?
> A possible compromise is to update the toolchain but stay on the
> same OS release, so that we still have testing that's relevant to
> people using older OS releases.
Windows Server 2003 isn't even EOL yet. I'd welcome a buildfarm member with
that OS and a modern toolchain.