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

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL supported platform report and a patch.

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Billy G(dot) Allie" <Bill(dot)Allie(at)mug(dot)org>,pgsql-ports(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL supported platform report and a patch.
Date: 2002-11-07 04:38:28
Message-ID: 5211.1036643908@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-ports
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I am fine with this because it only touches unixware-specific stuff,
> except the change to Tom's inline function:
>   [static] inline Datum
>   myFunctionCall2(FmgrInfo *flinfo, Datum arg1, Datum arg2)
> Tom will have to comment on that.

That change would actively break some platforms (see C99 inline
specifications).  Why is it necessary for SCO?  We certainly have
plenty of other static inline functions ...

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-ports by date

Next:From: Larry RosenmanDate: 2002-11-07 05:27:31
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL supported platform report and a patch.
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2002-11-07 04:03:18
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL supported platform report and a patch.

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2002-11-07 04:41:10
Subject: Re: 7.3b5 contrib compile problem
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2002-11-07 04:35:28
Subject: Re: Win32 port

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