Re: Raising our compiler requirements for 9.6
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Raising our compiler requirements for 9.6 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20150805151905.GJ12598@awork2.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Raising our compiler requirements for 9.6 (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Raising our compiler requirements for 9.6
Re: Raising our compiler requirements for 9.6 |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2015-08-05 11:12:34 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes: > > Ok, lets' do it that way then. It seems the easiest way to test for this > > is to use something like > > > # "IBM XL C/C++ for AIX, V12.1" miscompiles, for 32-bit, some inline > > # expansions of ginCompareItemPointers() "long long" arithmetic. To > > # take advantage of inlining, build a 64-bit PostgreSQL. > > test $(getconf HARDWARE_BITMODE) == '32' then > > CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -DPG_FORCE_DISABLE_INLINE" > > fi > > > in the xlc part of the template? (there's a ; missing and it should be CPPFLAGS rather than CFLAGS) > Actually, much the easiest way to convert what Noah did would be to add > > #if defined(__ILP32__) && defined(__IBMC__) > #define PG_FORCE_DISABLE_INLINE > #endif > > in src/include/port/aix.h. I'm ok with that too, although I do like the warning at configure time. I'd go with the template approach due to that, but I don't feel strongly about it. Andres
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: