Re: Raising our compiler requirements for 9.6 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

On 2015-08-06 10:29:39 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 3:09 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> > It really doesn't. It's just fallout from indirectly including lwlock.h
> > which includes an atomic variable. The include path leading to it is
> >
> > In file included from /home/andres/src/postgresql/src/include/storage/lwlock.h:19:0,
> >                  from /home/andres/src/postgresql/src/include/storage/lock.h:18,
> >                  from /home/andres/src/postgresql/src/include/access/tuptoaster.h:18,
> >                  from /home/andres/src/postgresql/src/bin/pg_resetxlog/pg_resetxlog.c:49:
> > /home/andres/src/postgresql/src/include/port/atomics.h:41:2: error: #error "THOU SHALL NOT REQUIRE ATOMICS"
> >  #error "THOU SHALL NOT REQUIRE ATOMICS"
> 
> Isn't that #include entirely superfluous?

Which one?