On 04/09/10 22:41, Tom Lane wrote:
I wrote:
I tried this on a PPC Mac running 10.4.11, which is the oldest Mac OS
I have handy at the moment. It worked fine. The existing coding in
ps_status.c dates from late 2001, which means that it was first tested
against OS X 10.1, and most likely we have not rechecked the question
of what PS_PADDING value to use since then. My guess is that Apple
must have changed this in OS X 10.2 or 10.3, because the userland
Unix utilities were pretty well settled after that.
Just for the archives' sake: I dug through the OS X source code archives
and confirmed that this behavior changed at 10.3: compare getproclline
in 10.2.8
http://www.opensource.apple.com/source/adv_cmds/adv_cmds-46/ps.tproj/print.c
vs 10.3
http://www.opensource.apple.com/source/adv_cmds/adv_cmds-63/ps.tproj/print.c
So we don't need a version check unless you're worried about somebody
trying to run Postgres 9.x on OS X 10.2 (which was retired in 2003).
What happens if someone does? Crash, or just wonky ps output? If it's
the latter, seems safe to backpatch.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
