Re: [HACKERS] ecpg bug and patch

2001-03-29 Thread Michael Meskes
On Wed, Mar 28, 2001 at 12:37:15PM +0300, Adriaan Joubert wrote: > Ooops, patch was the wrong way round. Here is a better one. Applied. I did add another set of braces for easier understanding though. :-) To be able to move ECPGt_long_long up the list we would have to bump the soname of the shar

Re: [HACKERS] ecpg bug and patch

2001-03-28 Thread Adriaan Joubert
Ooops, patch was the wrong way round. Here is a better one. Sorry, Adriaan diff -Naur postgresql-7.1RC1.orig/src/interfaces/ecpg/include/ecpgtype.h postgresql-7.1RC1/src/interfaces/ecpg/include/ecpgtype.h --- postgresql-7.1RC1.orig/src/interfaces/ecpg/include/ecpgtype.h Sun Jan 7 04:03

[HACKERS] ecpg bug and patch

2001-03-28 Thread Adriaan Joubert
Hi, I've been doing some tests with writing int8 to the database using ecpg. This does not work if the long long variable is in a structure, as it is not recognised as a simple type. The patch is attached, but is not very satisfactory. Moving the definition of ECPGt_lon