Re: Rename config.h to pg_config.h? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Ian Lance Taylor
Subject Re: Rename config.h to pg_config.h?
Date
Msg-id sipu9zu6ps.fsf@daffy.airs.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Rename config.h to pg_config.h?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:

> Another bug report complaining of include file name conflicts came in
> just now.  The only solution I can see is to rename config.h to
> something more project-specific.  Should we do this, or keep ignoring
> the problem?

I would vote for renaming it.  I've run into the problem of getting
the wrong config.h file.  config.h is a fine name to use for a
standalone tool.  It's not particularly good for a library, and
Postgres does have a library component.

FYI, in BFD (the library used for gdb and the GNU binutils) we jump
through hoops to to generate a bfd.h file which is properly configured
but does not include a config.h file--see, e.g., BFD_ARCH_SIZE and
BFD_HOST_64BIT_LONG in /usr/include/bfd.h on Linux.

Ian


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: AW: Re: OID wraparound: summary and proposal
Next
From: Paul Ramsey
Date:
Subject: PostGIS spatial extensions