Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > However, since we don't know if we support any non-integral off_t > platforms, and because a configure test would require us to have two > code paths for with/without integral off_t, I suggest we apply my > version of Philip's patch and let's see if everyone can compile it > cleanly.
Actually, it looks to me like configure will spit up if off_t is not an integral type: /* Check that off_t can represent 2**63 - 1 correctly. We can't simply define LARGE_OFF_T to be 9223372036854775807, since some C++ compilers masquerading as C compilers incorrectly reject 9223372036854775807. */ #define LARGE_OFF_T (((off_t) 1 << 62) - 1 + ((off_t) 1 << 62)) int off_t_is_large[(LARGE_OFF_T % 2147483629 == 721 && LARGE_OFF_T % 2147483647 == 1) ? 1 : -1]; So I think we're wasting our time to debate whether we need to support non-integral off_t ... let's just apply Bruce's version and wait to see if anyone has a problem before doing more work. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])