Re: fixing Makefile.shlib for solaris/gcc with -m64 flag
От | Jignesh K. Shah |
---|---|
Тема | Re: fixing Makefile.shlib for solaris/gcc with -m64 flag |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 45C1B8D0.6030600@sun.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: fixing Makefile.shlib for solaris/gcc with -m64 flag (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: fixing Makefile.shlib for solaris/gcc with -m64
flag
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
I dont think we solved this.. But I think the way to put -m64 should be same as in Linux and Solaris and not different. Thanks. Regards, Jignesh Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes: >> Am Mittwoch, 17. Januar 2007 17:12 schrieb Tom Lane: >>> "Jignesh K. Shah" <J.K.Shah@Sun.COM> writes: >>>> simple if I use -m64 for 64 bit then all end binaries are generated >>>> 64-bit and the shared libraries are generated 32-bit and the compilation >>>> fails (ONLY ON SOLARIS) since that particular line is only for the >>>> condition Solaris AND gcc. >>>> >>>> If I use the COMPILER which is CC + CFLAGS it passes -m64 properly to it >>>> and generates shared libraries 64-bit and the compile continues.. >>> Hmm ... I see we're doing it that way already for some other platforms, >>> but I can't help thinking it's a kluge. Wouldn't the correct answer be >>> that -m64 needs to be in LDFLAGS? > >> The correct answer may be to put -m64 into CC. > > Did we conclude that that was a satisfactory solution, or is this still > a live patch proposal? > > If -m64 in CC is the right solution, it should probably be mentioned in > FAQ_Solaris. > > regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: