Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
Искать
От
Andrew Dunstan
Тема
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT
Дата
в 06:16:33
Msg-id
0be2fa60-a92c-f7cd-d7ea-4c675dd07fc1@dunslane.net
Ответ на
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT (Andrew Dunstan)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
RE: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Jonathan Allen <jallen@americansavingslife.com>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
RE: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Jonathan Allen <jallen@americansavingslife.com>
RE: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Jonathan Allen <jallen@americansavingslife.com>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
RE: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Huong Dangminh <huo-dangminh@ys.jp.nec.com>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
RE: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Huong Dangminh <huo-dangminh@ys.jp.nec.com>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
RE: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Huong Dangminh <huo-dangminh@ys.jp.nec.com>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
RE: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Huong Dangminh <huo-dangminh@ys.jp.nec.com>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> 


On 05/19/2018 07:33 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> On 05/19/2018 07:31 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>>      /* add this define on XP only, not needed elsewhere */
>>>      #ifdef WIN32_WINNT
>>>      #if WIN32_WINNT < 0x0600
>>>      #define __USE_MINGW_ANSI_STDIO 1
>>>      #endif
>>>      #endif
>> I'd be inclined to just stick -D__USE_MINGW_ANSI_STDIO=1 into
>> frogmouth's configuration.  Given that we've already tossed
>> support for XP overboard in HEAD, it would seem a bit silly
>> to put it back in this way.
>>
>>
>
>
>
> Good point. Doing that now.
>


Well that seems to have crashed and burned badly. I'm just going to 
disable ecpg checks on this animal as suggested upthread.

cheers

andrew
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления
Предыдущее
От: Andrew Dunstan
Дата:
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
FAQ