On Tue, Jan 09, 2024 at 09:40:23AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 05, 2024 at 02:58:55PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> > I'm not a Windows expert, but my guess is that 0001 is a very good
> > idea. I hope someone who is a Windows expert will comment on that.
>
> I am +1 on 0001. It is just something we've never anticipated when
> these wrappers around cmd in pg_ctl were written.
I have now applied 0001 for pg_ctl.
While reviewing that, I have also noticed spawn_process() in
pg_regress.c that includes direct command invocations with cmd.exe /c.
Could it make sense to append an extra /d for this case as well?
--
Michael