Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
Subject: Re: Updated macOS start scripts
From: Mark Dilger <hornschnorter@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <21689.1510772433@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 12:02:16 -0800
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <F8F64F48-C070-41C1-A1EE-1F25836B6FAF@gmail.com>
References: <31338.1510763554@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <6D443E39-13C2-4185-9FE4-B5CB416AB06E@gmail.com>
 <21689.1510772433@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk


> On Nov 15, 2017, at 11:00 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>=20
> Mark Dilger <hornschnorter@gmail.com> writes:
>>> On Nov 15, 2017, at 8:32 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> The stuff in contrib/start-scripts/osx/ does not, as far as I know,
>>> work at all on any recent release of macOS, because SystemStarter
>>> is long gone.  I propose replacing it with the attached, which
>>> I've tested on current-vintage Macs.
>=20
>> Overall, I think supporting 10.10 and greater is more relevant than =
continuing
>> to support 10.4 and earlier, though I suppose someone could argue for
>> keeping both in side-by-side files with the README directing users =
which to
>> use for whichever version of OS X they happen to be running.  It's of =
no
>> consequence to me, since my oldest mac is running 10.6.8, but =
somebody
>> from the museum of old macs might feel differently.
>=20
> Well, we have no buildfarm coverage before 10.4, so to my mind those
> releases are desupported already.  In practice I wonder whether anyone
> is really running PG on such old releases anyway.  Certainly I =
wouldn't
> think they'd be making new PG installations on machines that old.

I have tested this on 10.11.6. I had no trouble following the =
instructions
in the README and everything worked as described.

As far as I can tell, this patch has not yet been submitted to any =
commitfest.
I would mark it Read for Committer.

mark