On 8/17/16 12:29 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Also, the early releases of OS X were rough enough that it's pretty hard
> to believe anyone is still using them anywhere (certainly the buildfarm
> isn't). So the odds of anyone caring if we remove this file seem
> negligible. Let's nuke it.
done
--
Pete
Robert Haas writes:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 9:55 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Peter Eisentraut writes:
>>> /* only needed in OS X 10.1 and possibly early 10.2 releases */
>>> Maybe it's time to let it go?
>> One part of me says it's not hurting anything, but another part
>> says that if it were bro
On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 9:55 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
>> /* only needed in OS X 10.1 and possibly early 10.2 releases */
>> Maybe it's time to let it go?
>
> One part of me says it's not hurting anything, but another part
> says that if it were broken we wouldn't know. And
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> /* only needed in OS X 10.1 and possibly early 10.2 releases */
> Maybe it's time to let it go?
One part of me says it's not hurting anything, but another part
says that if it were broken we wouldn't know. And it looks like
we can drop that whole subdirectory if we kil
