ECTED]]Sent: Tuesday,
January 17, 2006 8:34 PMTo: R, Rajesh (STSD)Cc:
pgsql-hackers@postgresql.orgSubject: Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] [PATCH] Better
way to check for getaddrinfo function."R, Rajesh (STSD)"
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But the bottomline is the default test
does not incl
On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 02:33:13PM +0530, R, Rajesh (STSD) wrote:
Its not a macro.
I meant that the code generated by AC_REPLACE_FUNCS([getaddrinfo]) by
configure.in for configure
does not have #include netdb.h. Hence function is not
detected(unresolved getaddrinfo).
Hence I thought
sorry. It is a macro.so, would it be better to
check for the macroas suggested by Tom or go with this patch$ diff -r configure.in configure.in.new918a919
AC_MSG_CHECKING([for getaddrinfo])920c921,926
AC_REPLACE_FUNCS([getaddrinfo])--- AC_TRY_LINK([#include
netdb.h #include
assert.h],
Where are we on this? Rajesh, I think we are waiting for more
information from you.
---
R, Rajesh (STSD) wrote:
That was very much situation specific.
But the bottomline is the default test does not include netdb.h in
R, Rajesh (STSD) [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But the bottomline is the default test does not include netdb.h in the
test code.
That's odd. Is getaddrinfo a macro on Tru64? If so, the appropriate
patch would probably make the test look more like the tests for finite()
and friends:
dnl Cannot
R, Rajesh (STSD) [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just thought that the following patch might improve checking for
getaddrinfo function (in configure.in)
Since AC_TRY_RUN tests cannot work in cross-compilation scenarios,
you need an *extremely* good reason to put one in. I thought this
might improve
Title: RE: [GENERAL] [PATCH] Better way to check for getaddrinfo function.
That was very much situation specific.
But the bottomline is the default test does not include netdb.h in the test code.
So, pg uses getaddrinfo.c.And the getaddrinfo.c does not work for me.
Ipv6 client
