Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1tGJR3-002Abi-I1 for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 27 Nov 2024 14:54:33 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1tGJR2-00FV0M-6P for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 27 Nov 2024 14:54:32 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1tGJR1-00FV0E-UA for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 27 Nov 2024 14:54:31 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([68.162.161.243]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1tGJQv-004Apx-Eq for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 27 Nov 2024 14:54:30 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 4AREsFg91856780; Wed, 27 Nov 2024 09:54:15 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: Thomas Munro cc: Sam James , pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: Build failure with GCC 15 (defaults to -std=gnu23) In-reply-to: References: <87o72eo9iu.fsf@gentoo.org> <3073930.1731867112@sss.pgh.pa.us> <3160019.1731875201@sss.pgh.pa.us> <3169079.1731880169@sss.pgh.pa.us> <3175762.1731883847@sss.pgh.pa.us> <3198438.1731895163@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Thomas Munro message dated "Wed, 27 Nov 2024 22:27:21 +1300" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-ID: <1856778.1732719255.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2024 09:54:15 -0500 Message-ID: <1856779.1732719255@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Thomas Munro writes: > On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 2:59 PM Tom Lane wrote: >> Yeah, that's a fair criticism. I don't think we've tested that code >> path since I retired prairiedog, so who's to say that it works even >> now? Maybe it's best to just delete that code, and if we ever find a >> new platform with wider bool, figure out what to do at that time. > Here's a draft patch for that. Passes an eyeball check, but I've not really tried to test it. I suppose the only meaningful test is likely to be letting the buildfarm loose on it. regards, tom lane