Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mAjZf-0000Cf-Cg for buildfarm-members@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 03 Aug 2021 01:50:31 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mAjZd-0005JT-Ip for buildfarm-members@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 03 Aug 2021 01:50:29 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mAjZd-0005J8-Do for buildfarm-members@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 03 Aug 2021 01:50:29 +0000 Received: from relay11.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.178.231]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mAjZa-0004nL-1i for buildfarm-members@postgresql.org; Tue, 03 Aug 2021 01:50:28 +0000 Received: (Authenticated sender: adsend@dunslane.net) by relay11.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E5E83100006; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 01:50:21 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: Release 13 of the PostgreSQL BuildFarm client To: Tom Lane Cc: buildfarm-members@postgresql.org References: <18c03f7e-3ab9-f7b4-9248-feb85b0f03ed@dunslane.net> <1660080.1627945870@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Andrew Dunstan Message-ID: Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2021 21:50:19 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1660080.1627945870@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk On 8/2/21 7:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan writes: >> I have pushed Release 13 of the PostgreSQL BuildFarm client. > FYI, this seems to have broken compatibility with ancient versions > of git. prairiedog and gaur/pademelon are both using > git version 1.7.9.6, and they both choked on the --prune-tags > option. I tried removing that, as it seemed possibly unnecessary, > but it didn't improve matters. Ouch. --prune-tags possibly is unnecessary. What happens when you remove it from the code? I will test tomorrow or Wednesday on a Centos5 dockerĀ  - there is an image on dockerhub with git 1.6. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com