Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Joe Conway said:
As a side note, I think it would be *really* helpful if there were a
more comprehensive test script, and an expected results file available.
Not sure though if it could be included in the standard regression
tests on a configure-conditional basis -- anyone kn
On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 09:33:57AM -0700, Joe Conway wrote:
> As a side note, I think it would be *really* helpful if there were a
> more comprehensive test script, and an expected results file available.
> Not sure though if it could be included in the standard regression tests
> on a configur
Alvaro Herrera said:
> On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 09:33:57AM -0700, Joe Conway wrote:
>
>> As a side note, I think it would be *really* helpful if there were a
>> more comprehensive test script, and an expected results file
>> available. Not sure though if it could be included in the standard
>> regr
Joe Conway said:
>
> As a side note, I think it would be *really* helpful if there were a
> more comprehensive test script, and an expected results file available.
> Not sure though if it could be included in the standard regression
> tests on a configure-conditional basis -- anyone know?
To the
Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As a side note, I think it would be *really* helpful if there were a
> more comprehensive test script, and an expected results file available.
> Not sure though if it could be included in the standard regression tests
> on a configure-conditional basis --
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Doh! Very bogus! sizeof(int)and a malloc to boot ???
I didn't check the trigger code much because it has supposedly been working
for quite a while. I will examine more closely.
Well, essentially 4 bytes (sizeof(int)) were being allocated to print a
two byte interger that can
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I will do some checking on these changes, but with those caveats they look
good to me.
Attached is an all inclusive revised patch. Please review and comment.
If there are no objections, I'll commit in a few hours.
As a side note, I think it would be *really* helpful if there
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I also got the rpath test sense wrong in the make file fix. It should read
(assuming this mailer dowsn't break lines badly):
ifeq ($(enable_rpath), yes)
SHLIB_LINK = $(perl_embed_ldflags) $(BE_DLLLIBS)
-Wl,-rpath,$(perl_archlibexp)/CORE
else
SHLIB_LINK = $(perl_embed_ldflags)
I also got the rpath test sense wrong in the make file fix. It should read
(assuming this mailer dowsn't break lines badly):
ifeq ($(enable_rpath), yes)
SHLIB_LINK = $(perl_embed_ldflags) $(BE_DLLLIBS)
-Wl,-rpath,$(perl_archlibexp)/CORE
else
SHLIB_LINK = $(perl_embed_ldflags) $(BE_DLLLIBS)
endif
Joe Conway said:
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> The attached patch (and 2 new files incorporating previous
>> eloglvl.[ch] as before) has the following changes over previously
>> sent patch
>> (fixes all by me):
>
> Some comments below:
>
>
> In plperl_trigger_build_args(), this l
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
The attached patch (and 2 new files incorporating previous eloglvl.[ch] as
before) has the following changes over previously sent patch
(fixes all by me):
Some comments below:
In plperl_trigger_build_args(), this looks bogus:
+ char *tmp;
+
+
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
The attached patch (and 2 new files incorporating previous eloglvl.[ch] as
before) has the following changes over previously sent patch
(fixes all by me):
The patch file itself seems to be empty -- please resend.
Thanks,
Joe
---(end of broadcast)--
Joe Conway said:
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> The attached patch (and 2 new files incorporating previous
>> eloglvl.[ch] as before) has the following changes over previously
>> sent patch
>> (fixes all by me):
>
> The patch file itself seems to be empty -- please resend.
>
it has 36k with expected
Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If you have some specific patches in mind, I can try to work on one or
> more tomorrow and Friday. Unfortunately, on Saturday morning I'm leaving
> on a 3600 mile roadtrip by car, and while I'm gone my connectivity will
> be spotty (for a week and a half)
Tom Lane wrote:
Are there any other pending patches you're interested in taking
responsibility for?
Yeah, I know you've been especially overloaded lately, and I feel badly
that I've not been able to help out in recent months :-(
If you have some specific patches in mind, I can try to work on one
Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I've been working with Andrew and company on this for a few days. I
> intend to finish up my code review and commit it tomorrow sometime,
> unless someone has objections.
Oh good. I've been feeling stretched a bit thin --- if you want to deal
with the pl
Joe Conway wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
The attached patch (and 2 new files incorporating previous
eloglvl.[ch] as
before) has the following changes over previously sent patch
(fixes all by me):
- fix null <-> undef mappings
- fix GNUmakefile to honor rpath configuration, and remove ugly compil
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
The attached patch (and 2 new files incorporating previous eloglvl.[ch] as
before) has the following changes over previously sent patch
(fixes all by me):
- fix null <-> undef mappings
- fix GNUmakefile to honor rpath configuration, and remove ugly compile
arnings due to inap
The attached patch (and 2 new files incorporating previous eloglvl.[ch] as
before) has the following changes over previously sent patch
(fixes all by me):
- fix null <-> undef mappings
- fix GNUmakefile to honor rpath configuration, and remove ugly compile
arnings due to inappropriate use of rpat
19 matches
Mail list logo
