On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 03:26:36PM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> My plan now is to commit this patch so that problem #1 is solved, prod
> conchuela's owner to upgrade to solve #2, and wait until Tom shuts
> down prairiedog to solve #3. Then we could consider removing the
> HAVE_FDATASYNC probe and associated #ifdefs when convenient. For that
> reason, I'm not too bothered about the slight weirdness of defining
> HAVE_FDATASYNC on Windows even though that doesn't come from
> configure; it'd hopefully be short-lived. Better ideas welcome,
> though. Does that make sense?
Do you still need HAVE_DECL_FDATASYNC?
--
Michael