Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > OK, now we have a problem. :-(
>
> No kidding. I said to begin with that this plan to use target-specific
> configuration knowledge to build a program executable by the host would
> not work. I'm for reverting Peter's initial patch; maybe we can someday
> find an answer, but this ain't it.
Yea, I knew my original NO_PGPORT wasn't going to be the last, but now
we are stuck.
Add to this something Magnus mentioned that I did not see until just
now. The backend links in timezone/SUBSYS.o, which doesn't use pgport,
so you have pgport versions and native versions of some functions in the
same backend binary. I am not sure that will always work. Add to that,
are those object files fully compatible with the backend?
-- 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,
Pennsylvania19073
