Re: Testing for int64 (was Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server/ /configure

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, <pgsql-ports(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Testing for int64 (was Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server/ /configure
Date: 2003-01-29 17:59:30
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.44.0301291857050.789-100000@localhost.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committerspgsql-hackerspgsql-ports

Tom Lane writes:

> I think a reasonable choice in cross-compiling situations would be to
> assume int64 works if we have a long long int datatype, but to force use
> of our own snprintf rather than trusting to luck with the platform's.

That's approximately what's happening. Formerly it insisted on doing a
run check to detect the int64 type. Now it does a compile check when
cross-compiling.

For the snprintf format detection we obviously don't have that chance. I
just refactored the code a little and added a cache variable so the
advanced cross-compiling user can override the check with known values.

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

In response to

Browse pgsql-ports by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message sachin 2003-01-30 09:57:45 Request for PostgreSql performance and stability data
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-01-29 01:50:58 Testing for int64 (was Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server/ /configure /configure.in...)

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2003-01-29 18:01:37 Re: Request for qualified column names
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2003-01-29 17:54:09 Re: [mail] Re: Windows Build System

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2003-01-29 19:37:23 pgsql-server/src/backend/executor Tag: REL7_2_ ...
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-01-29 15:24:57 pgsql-server/src/backend/executor Tag: REL7_3_ ...