On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 03:43:02PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >Mac OSX 10.4.11 - GNU Bison version 1.28
>
> We have not supported any version less than 1.875 for as long as I
> have been working on Postgres.
We switched to 1.50 at some point in 2002 because we had to, ecpg had reached
the lim
Shane Ambler wrote:
The real question is slow-to-upgrade OSes like HP-UX, AIX, OpenBSD
and Solaris. What version of Bison are they shipping with?
Mac OSX 10.4.11 - GNU Bison version 1.28
We have not supported any version less than 1.875 for as long as I have
been working on Postgres.
On 7/11/09 12:24 PM, Shane Ambler wrote:
The real question is slow-to-upgrade OSes like HP-UX, AIX, OpenBSD
and Solaris. What version of Bison are they shipping with?
Mac OSX 10.4.11 - GNU Bison version 1.28
Hmmm, given the number of other OSS things which won't install on 10.4
(like Firefox
The real question is slow-to-upgrade OSes like HP-UX, AIX, OpenBSD and
Solaris. What version of Bison are they shipping with?
Mac OSX 10.4.11 - GNU Bison version 1.28
--
Shane Ambler
pgSQL (at) Sheeky (dot) Biz
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make
Em Thu, 09 Jul 2009 19:58:01 -0300, Josh Berkus
escreveu:
The real question is slow-to-upgrade OSes like HP-UX, AIX, OpenBSD and
Solaris. What version of Bison are they shipping with?
In AIX 5.3: bison (GNU Bison) 1.875
[]s
Dickson S. Guedes
http://pgcon.postgresql.org.br
http://www.postg
On Friday 10 July 2009 00:58:01 Josh Berkus wrote:
> Tom,
>
> > As best I can tell, they ended up not changing the API, and there is no
> > reason we shouldn't depend on the feature and continue to claim that we
> > work with bison>= 1.875. Does anyone feel uncomfortable with that?
> > (It may be
Josh Berkus wrote:
> The real question is slow-to-upgrade OSes like HP-UX, AIX, OpenBSD
> and Solaris. What version of Bison are they shipping with?
I don't know about them, but just so you know:
kgri...@inhouseapps:~> cat /etc/SuSE-release
SUSE LINUX Enterprise Server 9 (i586)
VERSION = 9
Tom,
As best I can tell, they ended up not changing the API, and there is no
reason we shouldn't depend on the feature and continue to claim that we
work with bison>= 1.875. Does anyone feel uncomfortable with that?
(It may be of mostly academic interest anyway, since I bet few people
are still
