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

Re: compile bug in HEAD?

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Neil Conway <nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>,Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>,Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: compile bug in HEAD?
Date: 2002-03-28 00:56:15
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.30.0203271955040.690-100000@peter.localdomain (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Neil Conway writes:

> I'm curious; why is this "not the right fix"? According to the manpage:
>
> -l	turns  on  maximum compatibility with the original
> 	AT&T lex implementation. Note that this does not
> 	mean full compatibility.  Use of this option
> 	costs a  considerable  amount  of performance...

The manpage also lists the specific incompatibilities.  I think we should
not be affected by them, but someone better check before removing the -l.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Christopher Kings-LynneDate: 2002-03-28 01:20:30
Subject: Re: Mailing List Question
Previous:From: Neil ConwayDate: 2002-03-27 23:53:53
Subject: Re: compile bug in HEAD?

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