Feedback-ID: ie3de48e3:Fastmail
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2026 18:08:12 +0200
From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=81lvaro?= Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
Cc: Hans Buschmann <buschmann@nidsa.net>, Erik Rijkers <er@xs4all.nl>,
	"pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: AW: PG19beta1: GCC 16.1.1 warning: =?utf-8?B?4oCYYWN0dWFsX2Fy?=
 =?utf-8?B?Z190eXBlc+KAmQ==?= may be used uninitialized in clauses.c
Message-ID: <ajQXxk0eohQ8BNe9@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <ajQXL6rEkHottp3q@nathan>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/ajQXxk0eohQ8BNe9%40alvherre.pgsql>
Precedence: bulk

On 2026-Jun-18, Nathan Bossart wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 18, 2026 at 11:33:23AM +0000, Hans Buschmann wrote:
> > I also can confirm that this silences the compiler warning of GCC 16.1.1.
> 
> Thanks!  I'm debating whether to back-patch this to unsupported branches.
> IIUC it qualifies.  I'm getting ready to bump up the minimum supported
> version of pg_dump and friends to v10, so maybe I should stop there.  But
> also, stopping at v14 might be good enough for something small like this.
> Any opinions?

I'd stop at 14 and call it a day.  It doesn't prevent building, which is
IIRC the criteria we use for the older branches.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera         PostgreSQL Developer  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"You're _really_ hosed if the person doing the hiring doesn't understand
relational systems: you end up with a whole raft of programmers, none of
whom has had a Date with the clue stick."              (Andrew Sullivan)
https://postgr.es/m/20050809113420.GD2768@phlogiston.dyndns.org