From: | Dave Smith <dave(at)candata(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Billy G(dot) Allie" <bga(at)mug(dot)org>, "Arno A(dot) Karner" <karner(at)tnss(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: compiling pg 7.0.3 on sco 5.0.5 |
Date: | 2000-12-04 15:36:35 |
Message-ID: | 3A2BBA03.4080500@candata.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Billy G. Allie" <bga(at)mug(dot)org> writes:
>
>> ... The DISABLE_COMPLEX_MACRO definition was originally put in to work
>> around a macro size limitation of the UnixWare 2.1 C compiler (and
>> later the SCO UDK (Universal Development Kit)). If the gnu C compiler
>> is being used it should not be defined.
>
>
> Hm. Is anyone likely to still be using a version of that compiler that
> still has such limitations?
>
> I ask because we recently pulled "#define DISABLE_COMPLEX_MACRO" from
> port/sco.h, on the grounds that various people were seeing more harm
> than good from it. But I'm suddenly wondering whether those people
> might've been using gcc. I wonder if
>
> #ifndef __GNUC__
> #define DISABLE_COMPLEX_MACRO
> #endif
>
> in port/sco.h would be the smart way to go.
>
> regards, tom lane
Well I recompilied with the stock cc shipped in the SCO development
package for OpenServer 5. It was released in 97'.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | bpalmer | 2000-12-04 15:45:10 | Re: beta testing version |
Previous Message | Larry Rosenman | 2000-12-04 15:33:58 | Re: compiling pg 7.0.3 on sco 5.0.5 |