Re: LOCK Fixes/Break on FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Larry Rosenman <ler(at)lerctr(dot)org>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: LOCK Fixes/Break on FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE
Date: 2000-11-29 04:55:48
Message-ID: 26300.975473748@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Larry Rosenman <ler(at)lerctr(dot)org> writes:
>> Here is the "Current" /usr/include/machine/lock.h:
>> ...
>> void s_lock __P((struct simplelock *));
>> ...

Ick. Seems like the relevant question is not so much "why did it break"
as "how did it ever manage to work"?

I have no problem with renaming our s_lock, if that's what it takes,
but I'm curious to know why there is a problem now and not before.
We've called that routine s_lock for a *long* time, so it seems
like there must be some factor involved that I don't see just yet...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Larry Rosenman 2000-11-29 04:56:49 Re: LOCK Fixes/Break on FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE
Previous Message Alfred Perlstein 2000-11-29 04:55:37 Re: Re: LOCK Fixes/Break on FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE