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 1sayNq-00Cgrv-C7 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 05 Aug 2024 14:08:22 +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 1sayNo-00EALh-Ce for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 05 Aug 2024 14:08:20 +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 1sayNo-00EALY-2H for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 05 Aug 2024 14:08:20 +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 1sayNl-003EHi-OP for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Mon, 05 Aug 2024 14:08:18 +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 475E84iH1065807; Mon, 5 Aug 2024 10:08:05 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Heikki Linnakangas cc: Peter Eisentraut , pgsql-hackers Subject: Re: Remove support for old realpath() API In-reply-to: <188d0f5f-aed9-46b6-a9a6-eee55401f763@iki.fi> References: <9e638b49-5c3f-470f-a392-2cbedb2f7855@eisentraut.org> <188d0f5f-aed9-46b6-a9a6-eee55401f763@iki.fi> Comments: In-reply-to Heikki Linnakangas message dated "Mon, 05 Aug 2024 10:41:25 +0300" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1065805.1722866884.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2024 10:08:04 -0400 Message-ID: <1065806.1722866884@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Heikki Linnakangas writes: > We don't seem to have any mentions of POSIX or SuS in docs, in the > installation sections. There are a few mentions of POSIX-1.2008 and > POSIX-1.2001 it in the commit log, though, where we require features > specified by those. Can we rely on everything from POSIX-1-2008 > nowadays, or is it more on a case-by-case basis, depending on which > parts of POSIX are supported by various platforms? I'd say it's still case-by-case. Perhaps everything in POSIX-1.2008 is supported now on every platform we care about, but perhaps not. regards, tom lane