Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: [HACKERS] Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...)

2003-08-30 Thread Larry Rosenman
--On Saturday, August 30, 2003 00:51:01 -0400 Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Larry Rosenman wrote: > Yes, and that is the complex part because _some_ non-*_r functions are > thread-safe, and some are not. I have to determine if we have other > such platforms before I figure out how t

Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: [HACKERS] Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...)

2003-08-30 Thread Bruce Momjian
Larry Rosenman wrote: > > Yes, and that is the complex part because _some_ non-*_r functions are > > thread-safe, and some are not. I have to determine if we have other > > such platforms before I figure out how to fix it in the cleanest way. > > > > In most platforms that are like this, I think,

Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: [HACKERS] Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...)

2003-08-30 Thread Bruce Momjian
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > > On Sat, 30 Aug 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Yes, and that is the complex part because _some_ non-*_r functions are > > thread-safe, and some are not. I have to determine if we have other > > such platforms before I figure out how to fix it in the cleanest way.

Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: [HACKERS] Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...)

2003-08-30 Thread Larry Rosenman
--On Saturday, August 30, 2003 00:17:41 -0400 Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Larry Rosenman wrote: --On Saturday, August 30, 2003 01:09:54 -0300 "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 'K, but why the change to NEEDS_REENTRANT_FUNC_NAMES in the first > place? > > The thing

Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: [HACKERS] Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...)

2003-08-30 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Yes, and that is the complex part because _some_ non-*_r functions are > thread-safe, and some are not. I have to determine if we have other > such platforms before I figure out how to fix it in the cleanest way. Long shot ... is there some way of wr

Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: [HACKERS] Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...)

2003-08-30 Thread Bruce Momjian
Larry Rosenman wrote: > > > --On Saturday, August 30, 2003 01:09:54 -0300 "Marc G. Fournier" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > 'K, but why the change to NEEDS_REENTRANT_FUNC_NAMES in the first place? > > > > The thing that has me most confused here is that the end result is the > > same

Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: [HACKERS] Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...)

2003-08-30 Thread Larry Rosenman
--On Saturday, August 30, 2003 01:09:54 -0300 "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 'K, but why the change to NEEDS_REENTRANT_FUNC_NAMES in the first place? The thing that has me most confused here is that the end result is the same with or without the patch, from what I can tell ...

Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: [HACKERS] Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...)

2003-08-30 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003, Larry Rosenman wrote: > > > --On Saturday, August 30, 2003 00:57:45 -0300 "Marc G. Fournier" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, 29 Aug 2003, Larry Rosenman wrote: > > > >> Index: src/port/thread.c > >> =

Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: [HACKERS] Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...)

2003-08-30 Thread Larry Rosenman
--On Saturday, August 30, 2003 00:57:45 -0300 "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Fri, 29 Aug 2003, Larry Rosenman wrote: Index: src/port/thread.c === RCS file: /projects/cvsroot/pgsql-server/src/port/thread.c,v ret

Unixware Patch (Was: Re: [HACKERS] Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...)

2003-08-30 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003, Larry Rosenman wrote: > Index: src/port/thread.c > === > RCS file: /projects/cvsroot/pgsql-server/src/port/thread.c,v > retrieving revision 1.4 > diff -u -r1.4 thread.c > --- src/port/thread.c 16 Aug 2003 15:35: