From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | pgsql(at)rkirkpat(dot)net, pgsql-ports(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Re: Call for port testing on fmgr changes -- Results! |
Date: | 2000-06-25 04:15:44 |
Message-ID: | 23225.961906544@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-ports |
Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> Tamotsu Nakagawa has posted a fix for this to a local mail list in
> Japan. Can someone comment on this? According to him, with the patch
> now only the geometry test fails.
> void
> -abstime2tm(AbsoluteTime time, int *tzp, struct tm * tm, char *tzn)
> +abstime2tm(AbsoluteTime _time, int *tzp, struct tm * tm, char *tzn)
> {
> + time_t time = (time_t) _time;
> #ifdef USE_POSIX_TIME
> struct tm *tx;
Hmm, that makes all kinds of sense if time_t is not the same size as
AbsoluteTime --- which wouldn't surprise me at all on a 64-bit system.
time_t *ought* to be 64-bits on such a machine. The casts in that
routine,
tx = localtime((time_t *) &time);
are obviously bogus if so. Can anyone with an Alpha comment?
What surprises me more is the implication that this is the only place
that makes such a bogus assumption about the size of time_t. I'd have
guessed there are more places...
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2000-06-25 04:31:45 | Re: About the pid and opts files |
Previous Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2000-06-25 02:46:20 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: Call for port testing on fmgr changes -- Results! |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2000-06-25 04:36:13 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: Call for port testing on fmgr changes -- Results! |
Previous Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2000-06-25 02:46:20 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: Call for port testing on fmgr changes -- Results! |