Tom Lane wrote:
> Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> writes:
>
>> "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
>>
>>> I really don't understand Peter's objection here. This thread has
>>> already consumed more person-time than I spent on applying the
>>> back-patch.
>>>
>
>
>> Well I certainly wouldn't expect us to feel obligated to spend much effort
>> making 8.1 work with a new Redhat release, for example. We would just say 8.1
>> is only supported on those systems it was supported on when it was released.
>>
>
> Well, it would certainly depend on how much effort was involved to make
> it work. In this case, I drew the line at messing with autoconf ;-) ...
> otherwise I might've tried to fix 7.4 as well.
>
>
>
I think your action has been entirely appropriate.
Just to show you how wrong Peter's objection is - yesterday I found
myself having to build 7.1 so I could recover some data for a client. So
we occasionally need to build long, long after the release.
cheers
andrew