Re: BeOS take 2

From: Giles Lean <giles(at)nemeton(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: david(at)jetnet(dot)co(dot)uk, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BeOS take 2
Date: 2000-06-09 20:46:23
Message-ID: 8310.960583583@nemeton.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches


On Fri, 09 Jun 2000 11:26:40 -0400 Tom Lane wrote:

> I'm not sure if HAVE_SYS_UN_H is an appropriate way of testing
> for it or not (I see you did it that way in a couple of places).
> I'd rather make a new symbol HAVE_UNIX_SOCKETS, I think, and

HAVE_AF_UNIX or HAVE_AF_UNIX_SOCKETS might be clearer about what the
feature includes/excludes.

Regards,

Giles

In response to

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chris Bitmead 2000-06-10 00:05:42 Re: Re: [CORE] Re: MY PATCH
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2000-06-09 17:33:00 Re: Hack to make postgres compile on Dec 4.0f with GCC