Re: Raising our compiler requirements for 9.6

On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> On 2015-08-06 10:29:39 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 3:09 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
>> > It really doesn't. It's just fallout from indirectly including lwlock.h
>> > which includes an atomic variable. The include path leading to it is
>> >
>> > In file included from /home/andres/src/postgresql/src/include/storage/lwlock.h:19:0,
>> >                  from /home/andres/src/postgresql/src/include/storage/lock.h:18,
>> >                  from /home/andres/src/postgresql/src/include/access/tuptoaster.h:18,
>> >                  from /home/andres/src/postgresql/src/bin/pg_resetxlog/pg_resetxlog.c:49:
>> > /home/andres/src/postgresql/src/include/port/atomics.h:41:2: error: #error "THOU SHALL NOT REQUIRE ATOMICS"
>> >  #error "THOU SHALL NOT REQUIRE ATOMICS"
>>
>> Isn't that #include entirely superfluous?
>
> Which one?

Never mind, I'm confused.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company