Re: remove dead ports?

On 6 May 2012 15:23, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> On 6 May 2012 01:06, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> I think we should err on the side of removing less rather than more.
>>> It won't hurt anything much to leave these around for another few
>>> years.
>
>> I think it's better to force users of platforms like IRIX and BSD/OS,
>> platforms which are obsolete according to any practical definition, to
>> use earlier branches that presumably are known to have had a certain
>> amount of testing.
>
> If there are any such users, we should be trying to get them to provide
> a buildfarm member, so that we can honestly say that the port works.
> I see removal of the port files as a way to send an unmistakable signal
> that we're not going to continue to guess about that. We can always put
> back a given port if volunteers emerge to support it.

About 3 years ago I tried to get a loan machine running IRIX, given
that I used to have an SGI O2 for data visualisation work about a
decade ago.
I couldn't get through to anybody or even raise interest.

Agree with comments upthread, if you run IRIX you can use earlier
versions of Postgres that support it.

SGI support for IRIX ends in Dec 2013, following on from
discontinuation of hardware in 2006/7
http://www.sgi.com/services/support/irix_mips_support.html

Which means 9.3 will not have an IRIX platform to run on for more than
a few months after release, so I think we should remove IRIX support
now.

SGI themselves ship Red Hat or SUSE now anyway
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRIX

Any objections to removing irix support now?

--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services