Re: Rename config.h to pg_config.h?
| От | Ian Lance Taylor |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Rename config.h to pg_config.h? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | sipu9zu6ps.fsf@daffy.airs.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Rename config.h to pg_config.h? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > Another bug report complaining of include file name conflicts came in > just now. The only solution I can see is to rename config.h to > something more project-specific. Should we do this, or keep ignoring > the problem? I would vote for renaming it. I've run into the problem of getting the wrong config.h file. config.h is a fine name to use for a standalone tool. It's not particularly good for a library, and Postgres does have a library component. FYI, in BFD (the library used for gdb and the GNU binutils) we jump through hoops to to generate a bfd.h file which is properly configured but does not include a config.h file--see, e.g., BFD_ARCH_SIZE and BFD_HOST_64BIT_LONG in /usr/include/bfd.h on Linux. Ian
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: