| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Updating IPC::Run in CI? |
| Date: | 2025-09-22 20:27:21 |
| Message-ID: | jiguuvohfj2tmggwoqzyuxklk5iql744rexnlrj3xdfobganc4@mczzloljbzcp |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2025-09-22 13:17:09 -0700, Jacob Champion wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 12:35 PM Jacob Champion
> <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> > Right. On the Debian side, looks like bookworm is stuck on 20220807.0
> > -- and updating to trixie won't help us either; that just gets us up
> > to 20231003.0.
>
> To more explicitly defend my position here: I can request updates from
> package maintainers for <insert OS here>, but if the end result is
> that our LTS distributions will still be lagging, there's not much
> point. I'd rather bake the latest IPC::Run into our CI, and I'm happy
> to contribute code and cycles towards that.
>
> Any other opinions?
I think your position has merit. However, I'd like to have at least one of the
tasks continue to use the non-built-in IPC::Run.
I'll review patches installing a newer IPC::Run.
Seperately, I wonder if we ought to add a warning to configure/meson output
about IPC::Run < 2025...
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alexander Lakhin | 2025-09-22 20:30:00 | Re: GNU/Hurd portability patches |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2025-09-22 20:24:08 | Re: Updating IPC::Run in CI? |