| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Petr Jelinek <pjmodos(at)seznam(dot)cz>, Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>, voss(at)arnet(dot)com(dot)br, Chuck McDevitt <cmcdevitt(at)greenplum(dot)com>, "Patches (PostgreSQL)" <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.0.3 and Ipv6 |
| Date: | 2005-08-22 13:57:58 |
| Message-ID: | 4309D9E6.9060403@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
>Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>
>
>>Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>
>>>If you like, you can improve initdb to comment that line out if
>>>getaddrinfo chokes on "::1", rather than believing HAVE_IPV6.
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>>Good idea. Here's a patch for that. Rather than commenting it out I used
>>the slightly newer initdb facility to remove it and the associated
>>comment line altogether.
>>
>>
>
>Hm, is that really better than just commenting it out? Particularly
>on Windows, where we could imagine someone installing a newer version
>of the relevant DLL and then wanting to use IPv6. Seems to me that
>leaving the line present but commented out is the right thing, because
>it documents how things should look for IPv6.
>
>
>
>
Seemed to me slightly less potentially confusing, but I don't feel
strongly. Try this instead if you prefer.
cheers
andrew
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| initdb-ip6.patch2 | text/plain | 1.8 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-08-22 14:02:15 | Re: Sleep functions |
| Previous Message | Palle Girgensohn | 2005-08-22 13:49:16 | Re: Win32 unicode vs ICU |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-08-22 14:12:11 | Re: Win32 unicode vs ICU |
| Previous Message | Palle Girgensohn | 2005-08-22 13:49:16 | Re: Win32 unicode vs ICU |