Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: uintptr_t for Datum

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: uintptr_t for Datum
Date: 2009-12-31 18:08:49
Message-ID: 13871.1262282929@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> BTW, it looks like the patch is showing a manual change to
>> pg_config.h.in.  Don't do that.  Run autoheader.

> I wasn't aware autoheader existed.  Is that new or has it alwasy been
> part of autoconf?

It's always been there, or at least for many years.  pg_config.h.in
really ought to be thought of the same as configure: you don't edit
it, you just generate it.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Turner, IanDate: 2009-12-31 18:09:40
Subject: Re: Re-enabling SET ROLE in security definer functions
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2009-12-31 17:50:20
Subject: Re: Serializable Isolation without blocking

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group