Re: Beta going well

From: Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us
Cc: lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org, pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us, scrappy(at)hub(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Beta going well
Date: 2001-11-05 02:47:49
Message-ID: 20011105114749S.t-ishii@sra.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Probably not, considering it has not been announced anywhere outside
> this list. Ahem.
>
> Since we've made a number of fixes in the past two weeks, I think
> our next step should be to roll a beta2, and then actually announce it
> [as in pgsql-announce]. We can argue more about schedule after that's
> been out for a week or so.
>
> Anyone have stuff that they need to get in there before beta2?

Yes. doesn't compile on AIX 5L. I would like to fix it before beta2
(see attached pacthes below).

However I'm not sure if it's a correct solution. Problem is, AIX 5L
has sys/inttypes.h where int8, int16, int32 and int64 are
defined. Should we detect them in configure? Also, I'm afraid it would
break other AIX versions. Comments?
--
Tatsuo Ishii

*** include/c.h.orig Mon Oct 29 11:58:33 2001
--- include/c.h Mon Oct 29 12:08:13 2001
***************
*** 205,213 ****
--- 205,215 ----
* frontend/backend protocol.
*/
#ifndef __BEOS__ /* this shouldn't be required, but is is! */
+ #if !defined(_AIX)
typedef signed char int8; /* == 8 bits */
typedef signed short int16; /* == 16 bits */
typedef signed int int32; /* == 32 bits */
+ #endif /* _AIX */
#endif /* __BEOS__ */

/*
***************
*** 275,281 ****
--- 277,285 ----
#else
#ifdef HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT_64
/* We have working support for "long long int", use that */
+ #if !defined(_AIX)
typedef long long int int64;
+ #endif /* _AIX */
typedef unsigned long long int uint64;

#else

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2001-11-05 02:54:43 Re: Beta going well
Previous Message Hiroshi Inoue 2001-11-05 02:41:45 Re: compiler warnings in ODBC