Re: pl/perl extension fails on Windows

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> writes:
>> On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 12:15:58PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> ... it's now looking to me like we should do the above with X = 5.13.4.
>>> That won't be a perfect solution, but it's about the best we can
>>> readily do. Realistically, nobody out in the wider world is likely
>>> to care about building current PG releases against such old Perl
>>> versions on Windows; if we satisfy our older buildfarm critters,
>>> it's enough for me.
>
>> MinGW default behavior matches "cl -D_USE_32BIT_TIME_T", and MSVC >= 2005
>> default behavior matches "gcc -D__MINGW_USE_VC2005_COMPAT"[1]. MinGW-built
>> Perl[2] does not mention _USE_32BIT_TIME_T in $Config{ccflags}, so we
>> typically must add _USE_32BIT_TIME_T when using MSVC to build 32-bit against
>> MinGW-built Perl. I'm considering two ways to achieve this:
>
> I don't really have an opinion about the relative merits of these changes,
> but why do anything? The existing solution has the buildfarm happy, and
> we've not heard any field complaints that I saw. I'm not sure we should
> spend more time on supporting obsolete toolchain combinations that aren't
> represented in the buildfarm.

I agree with this position. If people are looking for getting better
coverage about weird component combinations, I'd like to think that
they should provide an animal so as support is live and not
investigated afterwards. Remember for example the recent thread about
overlayfs (https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20171107135454.lbelbbvfgadljmuj@home.ouaza.com).
On top of that this thread deals with rather old components with 32b
stuff on Windows..
--
Michael