Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] Patch for m68k architecture - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tatsuo Ishii
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] Patch for m68k architecture
Date
Msg-id 199906130010.JAA04514@srapc451.sra.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] Patch for m68k architecture  ("Oliver Elphick" <olly@lfix.co.uk>)
List pgsql-hackers
>  >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

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Don Baccus
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] destroydb doesn't close connection with client (httpd <-> pg)
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] destroydb doesn't close connection with client (httpd <-> pg)