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

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 (view raw or flat)
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

pgsql-patches by date

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

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