Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] Patch for m68k architecture

From: Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: "Oliver Elphick" <olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp, Roman Hodek <Roman(dot)Hodek(at)informatik(dot)uni-erlangen(dot)de>, pgsql-ports(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] Patch for m68k architecture
Date: 1999-06-13 00:10:17
Message-ID: 199906130010.JAA04514@srapc451.sra.co.jp
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-ports

> >I reverted back the patch for include/storage/s_lock.h and seems
> >NetBSD/m68k port begins to work again.
> >
> >I think we should revert back the linux/m68k patches and leave them
> >for 6.5.1. Objection?
>
>That seems sensible; presumably no other current users are on linux_m68k
>or this would have been sorted already. I will keep it in the Debian
>version where there can't be any conflict with NetBSD users.
>
>It seems that the patch needs to depend not only on being m68k but also
>on being linux. What defined variable can we use to distinguish between
>the two?

I have changed
#if defined(__mc68000__)
to:
#if defined(__mc68000__) && defined(__linux__)
in s_lock.h.
--
Tatsuo Ishii

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 1999-06-13 00:54:16 Re: [HACKERS] destroydb doesn't close connection with client (httpd <-> pg)
Previous Message Don Baccus 1999-06-12 21:27:47 Re: [HACKERS] destroydb doesn't close connection with client (httpd <-> pg)

Browse pgsql-ports by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Herouth Maoz 1999-06-13 10:45:08 Re: [PORTS] On Solaris 2.6...
Previous Message Oliver Elphick 1999-06-12 20:02:06 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] Patch for m68k architecture