On 2015-08-30 15:28:42 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> No no no, I'm proposing to remove the above-quoted lines and the configure
> test.  sig_atomic_t is required by C89; there is no reason anymore to
> cope with it not being provided by <signal.h>.

Ok, that works for me. You seemed to be a bit more doubtful about the
sig_atomic_t support, that's why I thought you might want to do
something but rip it out. Seems like a pretty low risk thing to try.

Andres


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Reply via email to