| From: | Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Christian Convey <christian(dot)convey(at)gmail(dot)com>, Yury Zhuravlev <u(dot)zhuravlev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: WIP: About CMake v2 |
| Date: | 2016-08-18 19:57:50 |
| Message-ID: | 57B6133E.80201@kaltenbrunner.cc |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 08/18/2016 09:52 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
>> On 08/18/2016 09:30 PM, Christian Convey wrote:
>
>>> Yury: Would it make sense to add a call to "cmake_minimum_required" in
>>> one or more of your CMakeLists.txt files?
>>
>> it would make sense nevertheless but I dont think that 2.8.11 is old
>> enough - looking at the release information and the feature compatibily
>> matrix it would seems we should more aim at something like 2.8.0 or 2.8.3...
>
> Last year I checked versions installable in Debian:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20150829213631.GI2912@alvherre.pgsql
> From that I would say that the maximum minimum is 2.8.2. Not sure if
> there's any platform where 2.8.0 (released in 2009) or older would be
> necessary.
well we have for example a NetBSD 5.1 boxe (coypu) on the buildfarm that
have a software stack that is basically 2008/2009ish...
So 2.8.0-2.8.3 seems like a realistic target to me still
Stefan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christian Convey | 2016-08-18 20:02:04 | Re: WIP: About CMake v2 |
| Previous Message | Christian Convey | 2016-08-18 19:55:20 | Re: WIP: About CMake v2 |