Re: LOCK Fixes/Break on FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: LOCK Fixes/Break on FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE
Date
Msg-id 26300.975473748@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: LOCK Fixes/Break on FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE  (Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org>)
Responses Re: LOCK Fixes/Break on FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE  (Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org> writes:
>> Here is the "Current" /usr/include/machine/lock.h:
>> ...
>> void    s_lock            __P((struct simplelock *));
>> ...

Ick.  Seems like the relevant question is not so much "why did it break"
as "how did it ever manage to work"?

I have no problem with renaming our s_lock, if that's what it takes,
but I'm curious to know why there is a problem now and not before.
We've called that routine s_lock for a *long* time, so it seems
like there must be some factor involved that I don't see just yet...
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alfred Perlstein
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: LOCK Fixes/Break on FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE
Next
From: Larry Rosenman
Date:
Subject: Re: LOCK Fixes/Break on FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE