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

Re: Unix Domain Sockets error (was Re: [HACKERS] Alpha initdb fixed!)

From: "Pedro J(dot) Lobo" <pjlobo(at)euitt(dot)upm(dot)es>
To: Dwayne Bailey <dwayne(at)mika(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Unix Domain Sockets error (was Re: [HACKERS] Alpha initdb fixed!)
Date: 1998-03-18 11:00:47
Message-ID: Pine.OSF.3.96.980318115604.28376G-100000@haddock.euitt.upm.es (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 17 Mar 1998, Dwayne Bailey wrote:

>Re: your suggestion to use __alpha and not worry about the
>makefile, I'm a little uncomfortable with that.  DEC's cc will
>actually output different symbols, depending on the use of the
>- -std flag.  I'd rather have something that we have explicit
>control over, rather than relying on the compiler like this.  I'm
>not violently opposed to useing __alpha or anything, it's just a
>preference against it.

Here's an extract from the DEC's cc man page:

  The following table shows which macros are defined for each of the -std
  flags.

  -----------------------------------------------
  Macro                   std0        std   std1
                          (default)
  -----------------------------------------------
  LANGUAGE_C              yes         no    no
  __LANGUAGE_C__          yes         yes   yes
  unix                    yes         no    no
  __unix__                yes         yes   yes
  __osf__                 yes         yes   yes
  __alpha                 yes         yes   yes
  SYSTYPE_BSD             yes         no    no
  _SYSTYPE_BSD            yes         yes   yes
  LANGUAGE_ASSEMBLY       yes         yes   yes
  __LANGUAGE_ASSEMBLY__   yes         yes   yes
  -----------------------------------------------

As you can see, __alpha and __osf__ are always defined. However, I
understand your point. If we define 'alpha' in the template file, we are
protected from mind-changing vendors that define __alpha in DU 3.2 and
__alpha__ in DU 4.0 and alpha__ in DU 5.0 (just an example). From this
point of view, the current approach is better. And, it's always easier
(and safer) to leave things untouched.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Pedro José Lobo Perea                   Tel:    +34 1 336 78 19
Centro de Cálculo                       Fax:    +34 1 331 92 29
EUIT Telecomunicación - UPM             e-mail: pjlobo(at)euitt(dot)upm(dot)es


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Pedro J. LoboDate: 1998-03-18 11:08:12
Subject: Re: Unix Domain Sockets error (was Re: [HACKERS] Alpha initdb fixed!)
Previous:From: Michael MeskesDate: 1998-03-18 08:23:33
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] standards question

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