Re: ERRORDATA_STACK_SIZE panic crashes on Windows

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Subject: Re: ERRORDATA_STACK_SIZE panic crashes on Windows
Date: 2008-05-27 18:20:01
Message-ID: 6919.1211912401@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> We can either add a configure test or say that we don't support
>> such old versions of gettext ...

> Or we could just #ifdef the whole thing to win32, since it's not
> really needed on other platforms, pushing that decision to later...
> (when that version of gettext will be even more obsolete)

That would work for the moment, but we're almost certainly going to
have to insist on bind_textdomain_codeset being available eventually;
AFAICS there's no hope of multi-locale/multi-encoding support without it.

I was considering either:

1. Add a probe for bind_textdomain_codeset to configure, and
conditionalize the new patch on HAVE_BIND_TEXTDOMAIN_CODESET.

2. Adjust the AC_SEARCH_LIBS call to probe for bind_textdomain_codeset()
instead of gettext() as it does now. This would have the effect of
rejecting pre-0.10.36 versions of the library.

Magnus' suggestion gives a third possibility.

I notice that the PGAC_CHECK_GETTEXT macro already contains the comment
dnl FIXME: We should probably check for version >=0.10.36.
So depending on what that's about, there might be some other good
reasons to go with choice #2. Peter, it appears you put that comment in
when you first added the macro, on 2001-06-02. Do you remember why?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2008-05-27 18:24:44 Re: Remove redundant extra_desc info for enum GUC variables?
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2008-05-27 18:19:20 Re: Remove redundant extra_desc info for enum GUC variables?