Re: Dead code in ps_status.c

On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 6:34 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes:
> > Therefore I think it is safe to drop the PS_USE_PS_STRING and
> > PS_USE_CHANGE_ARGV code branches, remove a bunch of outdated comments
> > and macro tests, and prune the defunct configure/meson probe.
>
> Seems reasonable.  Patch passes an eyeball check.

Thanks for looking.

> > I guess (defined(sun) && !defined(BSD)) || defined(__svr5__) could be
> > changed to just defined(sun) (surely there are no other living
> > SysV-derived systems, and I think non-BSD Sun probably meant "Solaris
> > but not SunOS"), but I don't know so I didn't touch that.
>
> Hm, is "defined(sun)" true on any live systems at all?

My GCC compile farm account seems to have expired, or something, so I
couldn't check on wrasse's host (though whether wrasse is "live" is
debatable: Solaris 11.3 has reached EOL, it's just that the CPU is too
old to be upgraded, so it's not testing a real OS that anyone would
actually run PostgreSQL on).  But from some googling[1], I think
__sun, __sun__ and sun should all be defined.

Ohh, but __svr5__ should not be.  Solaris boxes define __svr4__, I was
confused by the two fives.  __svr5__ was SCO/Unixware, another dead
OS[1], so I think we can just remove that one too.  So, yeah, I think
we should replace (defined(sun) && !defined(BSD)) || defined(__svr5__)
with defined(__sun).  (Hmph.  We have all of __sun__, __sun and sun in
the tree.)

[1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/16618604/solaris-and-preprocessor-macros
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNIX_System_V#SVR5_/_UnixWare_7