Re: [HACKERS] use of pager on Windows psql
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] use of pager on Windows psql |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 482FD26D.5030603@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] use of pager on Windows psql (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] use of pager on Windows psql
|
Список | pgsql-patches |
Bruce Momjian wrote: > Andrew Dunstan wrote: > >>> Not sure why ware are not. Should we enabled that code on Win32 and see >>> how it works? Can you test it? Was it some MinGW limitation? I do see >>> isatty() being used on lots of platforms. >>> >>> This is kind of odd. Ah, I bet it came from libpq's PQprint(), which I >>> think we had working on Win32 long before we had psql working and >>> perhaps I copied it from there. I don't see the Win32 checks around >>> isatty() anywhere else. >>> >>> >>> >>>> In fact, it looks to me like it would be much more sensible to #include >>>> "settings.h" and then simply test pset.notty for all platforms. >>>> >>>> >>> Yes, we could do that but does the isatty() value ever change while psql >>> is running? When you do '\g filename' does stdout then have isatty as >>> false? >>> >>> >> Good point. I think the best thing would just be to remove the #ifndef >> WIN32 / #endif lines >> > > OK, patch applied to remove the Win32 test in both places. > > > This broke the buildfarm and finally explains the following kluge which has been puzzling me for four years: /* * for some reason MinGW (and MSVC) outputs an extra newline, so this * suppresses it */ #ifndef WIN32 fputc('\n', fout); #endif I have removed the kluge (and yes, I tested it). cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: