2009/12/31 Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>: > Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> writes: >> 2009/12/31 Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>: >>> Where's the logic to provide a definition of >>> intptr_t if the platform fails to? > >> autoconf does that. > > Oh, that's what I get for trying to review a patch before absorbing > any caffeine :-( ... I missed that you were relying on a built-in > autoconf macro.
:-) >> That also came out of Bruce's patch. Bruce, can you look at doing >> that? I don't have a machine easily accessible with the right autoconf >> version ATM :( > > It's a really bad idea to be committing configure changes without having > personally run the patch through autoconf. Right, this is why I had Bruce do that part, and send it to me separately. I figured one committer is as good as another. > As penance for being too quick to complain, I'll review and commit this > myself. If it works on my old HPUX box, it'll probably work everywhere ;-) Ok, deal :-) That's probably the one other platform beside Bruce's that gets reasonably-regular-testing and still doesn't have intptr_t. I'll be off to my newyears party now, enjoy the patch! Happy new year to you and other PostgreSQL hackers! -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
