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

Re: [HACKERS] ss_family in hba.c

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Kurt Roeckx <Q(at)ping(dot)be>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>,pgsql-cygwin(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] ss_family in hba.c
Date: 2003-06-23 23:49:11
Message-ID: 200306232349.h5NNnBL11529@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-cygwinpgsql-generalpgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
I have applied a patch to CVS to fix the problem.  It is all your patch,
except for the part you got from me, which was wrong.  :-(

It took me a while to realize the subtlety of your patch.  First, it
removes the use of sa_family_t _except_ for cases that don't have
SOCKADDR_STORAGE, where it is required.  Second, it allows for a
structure member named ss_family or __ss_family, tested via configure.

This should fix most platforms.  I am not sure how cygwin is going to
handle this --- we might have to add a specific sa_family_t typedef for
that platform --- MinGW does have sa_family_t, but probably doesn't need
it anyway.  Testing for the size of sa_family_t is possible via
configure, but if only cygwin needs it, we can just hard-code that
platform in the template files.  Cygwin folks, would you test CVS and
let me know.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 11:01:27PM -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > 
> > My system does have its own sockaddr_storage definition. I think
> > it uses __ss_ as the prefix. Also, after looking at the fallback
> > definition in pqcomm.h, I don't see where that defines ss_family
> > and hence don't see how that could work.
> > I am going to see if adding __ works as suggested by someone else
> > who replied.
> 
> See if this patch helps.
> 
> Don't forget to run autoconf after applying the patch.
> 
> 
> 
> Kurt
> 

[ Attachment, skipping... ]

> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
>       subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
>       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Responses

pgsql-cygwin by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2003-06-23 23:49:26
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] ss_family in hba.c
Previous:From: deststarDate: 2003-06-23 23:43:48
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] sa_family_t in cygwin compile of cvs

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2003-06-23 23:49:26
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] ss_family in hba.c
Previous:From: deststarDate: 2003-06-23 23:43:48
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] sa_family_t in cygwin compile of cvs

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2003-06-23 23:49:26
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] ss_family in hba.c
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2003-06-23 21:05:08
Subject: Re: Consistent timestamp input

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2003-06-23 23:49:26
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] ss_family in hba.c
Previous:From: Jochem van DietenDate: 2003-06-23 23:27:41
Subject: tsearch: immutable functions?

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