I wrote: > I've launched a run now, expect results from gcc HEAD in an hour and > a half or so.
... and it's happy. Thanks! BTW, the reason I went to the trouble of cranking up the buildfarm scripts on that machine (and it was painful :-() is that I don't believe any other buildfarm members are running compilers old enough to complain about some of the things these will. In particular: * I've got gaur configured so it will throw "array subscript of type char" complaints whenever somebody forgets to cast a <ctype.h> function argument to unsigned char. * pademelon will complain about // comments, variable-sized local arrays, flexible array syntax, non-static function definition after static declaration, and probably some other C89 violations that I am not remembering right now. While I'll not cry too hard when we decide to break C89 compatibility, I don't want it to happen accidentally; so having a pretty old-school compiler in the farm seems important to me. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers