Mike Mascari wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
I wrote:
This is standard practice for gcc: it tries to use "cleaned up"
versions
of system headers that will not elicit useless warnings from gcc. It's
a good idea, actually, because the degree of insanity in
vendor-supplied
system he
10/3.3.2/install-tools
# ./mkheaders
and they should be good to go
Mike Mascari
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
.1
installation that requires dumping for migration, but no binaries
due to compilation errors? Isn't that a rather low-probability scenario?
Mike Mascari
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
