Re: Complier warnings on mingw gcc 4.5.0 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Complier warnings on mingw gcc 4.5.0
Date
Msg-id 15710.1292464012@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Complier warnings on mingw gcc 4.5.0  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Responses Re: Complier warnings on mingw gcc 4.5.0  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> On 12/15/2010 07:24 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Should we backpatch either of these things?

> Yes. We need it to back at least to 9.0.

On reflection I think we probably better fix it back to 8.2, since we're
supposedly supporting Windows on all those branches, and somebody might
try to build any of them on modern mingw.

> I believe #2 is in fact necessary. When I tried just #1 before it 
> failed. What's the best way to do #2 cleanly?

We can't change the meaning of HAVE_INT_OPTRESET because that would
break the declaration logic in getopt.c.  I'm thinking we have to
complicate the #if logic in postmaster.c and postgres.c.  Will look
into it as soon as I get done with the contrib/seg patch (ie in an
hour or so).
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: Complier warnings on mingw gcc 4.5.0
Next
From: Daniele Varrazzo
Date:
Subject: Re: getting composite types info from libpq