On 18/01/2008, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> "Dave Page" <dpage@postgresql.org> writes:
> > On 18/01/2008, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Ah. That would work better than what I thought you were suggesting, but
> I still don't trust it a whole lot --- there's the problem of "universal
> binaries" (PPC & PPC64 & Intel) for instance, which I believe some
> people have managed to build Postgres as.
Yes, I maintain such a distribution :-). Actually, the suggested
output I posted earlier was from a Universal build - the uname output
shows Intel only of course, but the CFLAGS do show both architectures.
The other way of building a universal binary (other than cross
compiling one architecture as I do), is to take native binaries from
each platform and literally glue them together. That won't show the
differences through CFLAGS, but each section of the universal binary
would have it's own native uname output.
/D