Re: [HACKERS] sa_family_t in cygwin compile of cvs - Mailing list pgsql-cygwin
From | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Subject | Re: [HACKERS] sa_family_t in cygwin compile of cvs |
Date | |
Msg-id | 200306232351.h5NNpal11953@candle.pha.pa.us Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: [HACKERS] sa_family_t in cygwin compile of cvs (deststar <deststar@blueyonder.co.uk>) |
List | pgsql-cygwin |
OK, I just applied a patch which should fix cygwin too. Please give it a try. Thanks. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- deststar wrote: > Yes there's: > struct sockaddr { > unsigned short sa_family; /* address family, AF_xxx */ > char sa_data[14]; /* 14 bytes of protocol address */ > }; > in socket.h > > struct sockaddr { > u_short sa_family; > char sa_data[14]; > }; > in winsock.h & winsock2.h > > typedef struct sockaddr_ipx { > short sa_family; > char sa_netnum[4]; > char sa_nodenum[6]; > unsigned short sa_socket; > } SOCKADDR_IPX, *PSOCKADDR_IPX, *LPSOCKADDR_IPX; > in wsipx.h > > and for ss_family: > struct sockaddr_storage { > short ss_family; > char __ss_pad1[6]; /* pad to 8 */ > __int64 __ss_align; /* force alignment */ > char __ss_pad2[112]; /* pad to 128 */ > }; > in winsock2.h > > To be honest I'm not at all sure about the correctness of my patch as I > don't know what sa_family is for, I just did a search on google and > unsigned short seemd to be the answer & it seemed to pass the regression > test. > regards, > - Stuart > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > deststar, is there any sa_family or ss_family in the cygwin include > > directory, perhap with double leading underscores? > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > deststar wrote: > > > >>Jason Tishler wrote: > >> > >>>On Sun, Jun 15, 2003 at 04:54:21PM +0100, deststar wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>>On cygwin sa_family_t was undeclared, adding the following line: > >>>>typedef unsigned short sa_family_t; > >>>>to both: > >>>>src/port/getaddrinfo.c > >>>>src/include/libpq/pqcomm.h > >>> > >>> > >>>Isn't the attached or fixing Cygwin itself a better approach? > >>> > >>> > >> > >>Yes it does seem better, attached is a proposed patch to cygwin.h & > >>configure.in (incase cygwin gets it in future) > >>Have tested with make installcheck & it works fine. > >>If you see no problems I will sumit to patches > >>thanks, > >>- Stuart > > > > > >>*** src/include/port/cygwin.h.orig Thu May 22 18:20:28 2003 > >>--- src/include/port/cygwin.h Tue Jun 17 22:31:04 2003 > >>*************** > >>*** 21,23 **** > >>--- 21,28 ---- > >> #else > >> #define DLLIMPORT __declspec (dllimport) > >> #endif > >>+ > >>+ #ifndef HAVE_SA_FAMILY_T > >>+ typedef unsigned short sa_family_t; > >>+ #endif > >>+ > > > > > >>*** configure.in.orig Sun Jun 15 05:07:58 2003 > >>--- configure.in Tue Jun 17 22:22:24 2003 > >>*************** > >>*** 855,860 **** > >>--- 855,866 ---- > >> [$ac_includes_default > >> #include <netinet/in.h>]) > >> > >>+ AC_CHECK_TYPE(sa_family_t, > >>+ [AC_DEFINE(HAVE_SA_FAMILY_T,1,[Cygwin does not have sa_family_t defined so test])], > >>+ [], > >>+ [$ac_includes_default > >>+ #include <netinet/in.h>]) > >>+ > >> AC_CACHE_CHECK([for PS_STRINGS], [pgac_cv_var_PS_STRINGS], > >> [AC_TRY_LINK( > >> [#include <machine/vmparam.h> > > > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html > -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
pgsql-cygwin by date: