Re: [HACKERS] ecpg doesn't compile (datetime.h/dtime_t)

2003-10-07 Thread Patrick Welche
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 03:00:36PM +0100, Patrick Welche wrote: > On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 12:59:19PM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 06:41:48PM +0100, Patrick Welche wrote: > > > Today's cvs doesn't compile. I think it is due to > > > cvs diff -r1.7 -r1.8 src/interfaces/ecp

Re: [HACKERS] ecpg doesn't compile (datetime.h/dtime_t)

2003-10-03 Thread Patrick Welche
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 12:59:19PM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote: > On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 06:41:48PM +0100, Patrick Welche wrote: > > Today's cvs doesn't compile. I think it is due to > > cvs diff -r1.7 -r1.8 src/interfaces/ecpg/include/datetime.h > > I have dtime_t defined in my sys/types.h. The o

Re: [HACKERS] ecpg doesn't compile (datetime.h/dtime_t)

2003-10-03 Thread Michael Meskes
On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 06:41:48PM +0100, Patrick Welche wrote: > Today's cvs doesn't compile. I think it is due to > cvs diff -r1.7 -r1.8 src/interfaces/ecpg/include/datetime.h > I have dtime_t defined in my sys/types.h. The old version of datetime.h used I tried too hide these type definitions f

Re: [HACKERS] ecpg doesn't compile (datetime.h/dtime_t)

2003-09-30 Thread Patrick Welche
On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 08:08:01PM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote: > On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 06:41:48PM +0100, Patrick Welche wrote: > > Today's cvs doesn't compile. I think it is due to > > Forgot one question. WHich platform do you use? NetBSD - to quote cvs blame: 1.42 (eeh 30-Dec-99): typedef

Re: [HACKERS] ecpg doesn't compile (datetime.h/dtime_t)

2003-09-29 Thread Michael Meskes
On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 02:11:37PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Should that be visible to non-Informix-compatible builds, or is there > no way to control that. No, it is just defined if you include datetime.h which is supposed to replace Informix file. And the datetime type is only used inside co

Re: [HACKERS] ecpg doesn't compile (datetime.h/dtime_t)

2003-09-29 Thread Bruce Momjian
Michael Meskes wrote: > On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 06:41:48PM +0100, Patrick Welche wrote: > > Today's cvs doesn't compile. I think it is due to > > cvs diff -r1.7 -r1.8 src/interfaces/ecpg/include/datetime.h > > I have dtime_t defined in my sys/types.h. The old version of datetime.h used > > For ecpg

Re: [HACKERS] ecpg doesn't compile (datetime.h/dtime_t)

2003-09-29 Thread Michael Meskes
On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 06:41:48PM +0100, Patrick Welche wrote: > Today's cvs doesn't compile. I think it is due to > cvs diff -r1.7 -r1.8 src/interfaces/ecpg/include/datetime.h > I have dtime_t defined in my sys/types.h. The old version of datetime.h used Argh, didn't know that some systems have

Re: [HACKERS] ecpg doesn't compile (datetime.h/dtime_t)

2003-09-29 Thread Michael Meskes
On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 06:41:48PM +0100, Patrick Welche wrote: > Today's cvs doesn't compile. I think it is due to Forgot one question. WHich platform do you use? Michael -- Michael Meskes Email: Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo: michaelmeskes, Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Go

[HACKERS] ecpg doesn't compile (datetime.h/dtime_t)

2003-09-29 Thread Patrick Welche
Today's cvs doesn't compile. I think it is due to cvs diff -r1.7 -r1.8 src/interfaces/ecpg/include/datetime.h I have dtime_t defined in my sys/types.h. The old version of datetime.h used #define dtime_t timestamp, the new one uses a typedef. Is there actually a reason to keep dtime_t, or would just