Re: narwhal and PGDLLIMPORT
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: narwhal and PGDLLIMPORT |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 7336.1391579568@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: narwhal and PGDLLIMPORT (Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: narwhal and PGDLLIMPORT
Re: narwhal and PGDLLIMPORT Re: narwhal and PGDLLIMPORT |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > On 02/05/2014 06:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> I had been okay with the manual PGDLLIMPORT-sprinkling approach >> (not happy with it, of course, but prepared to tolerate it) as long >> as I believed the buildfarm would reliably tell us of the need for >> it. That assumption has now been conclusively disproven, though. > I'm kind of horrified that the dynamic linker doesn't throw its toys > when it sees this. Indeed :-(. The truly strange part of this is that it seems that the one Windows buildfarm member that's telling the truth (or most nearly so, anyway) is narwhal, which appears to have the oldest and cruftiest toolchain of the lot. I'd really like to come out the other end of this investigation with a clear understanding of why the newer toolchains are failing to report a link problem, and yet not building working executables. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: