"Dave Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 18/01/2008, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> uname is a separate executable. If you do system("uname") you'll get
>> results that reflect how uname was built, not how Postgres was built.
> My suggestion was that we take the output of uname at configure/build
> time and bung it in a macro, not do anything with system() at
> runtime...
Ah. That would work better than what I thought you were suggesting, but
I still don't trust it a whole lot --- there's the problem of "universal
binaries" (PPC & PPC64 & Intel) for instance, which I believe some
people have managed to build Postgres as.
> Anyway, Peter's suggestion seems much tidier.
Agreed. Also we could have it today if we base it off inspection of
pg_control_version.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
