Re: [PATCH] PostgreSQL fails to build with 32bit MinGW-w64 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Magnus Hagander
Subject Re: [PATCH] PostgreSQL fails to build with 32bit MinGW-w64
Date
Msg-id CABUevEwqe0Fxu5c+PhKA+XQBZ3d-G=f+rq2j59D6DQ3EhNU5XQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH] PostgreSQL fails to build with 32bit MinGW-w64  (NISHIYAMA Tomoaki <tomoakin@staff.kanazawa-u.ac.jp>)
Responses Re: [PATCH] PostgreSQL fails to build with 32bit MinGW-w64  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 15:49, NISHIYAMA Tomoaki
<tomoakin@staff.kanazawa-u.ac.jp> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Have you verified if tihs affects _MSC_VER < 1400? Suddently that
>> branch would care about HAVE_CRTDEFS_H, and I'm not sure if that's
>> something we need to worry about.
>
>
> I have no MSVC. In that sense it is not verified in fact, and I hope
> those who knows well would kindly comment on it.
>
> However, it appears that pg_config.h is not created through
> configure, but just copied from pg_config.h.win32 in those
> compilers and thus HAVE_CRTDEFS_H will not be defined.
> So, I think this code fragment will not be enabled in
> _MSC_VER < 1400

Hmm, true. Unless HAVE_CRTDEFS_H is defined by the sytem, which it
likely isn't - I was confusing it with the kind of defines that MSVC
tends to stick in their own headerfiles, and thought that's what you
were testing for.

--
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: why local_preload_libraries does require a separate directory ?
Next
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: backup_label during crash recovery: do we know how to solve it?