Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > > Ah, the problem was introduced here: > > Right, it was my fault. > > > The problem is that the PGAC_FUNC_PRINTF_ARG_CONTROL call was moved > > below the printf 64-bit tests. This commited patch moves > > PGAC_FUNC_PRINTF_ARG_CONTROL which is after we know AC_TRY_RUN works and > > just before printf 64-bit args are tested. > > This patch breaks things in a different way: you should not have moved > the AC_LIBOBJ(snprintf) step. Also you randomly placed the arg-control > test between a chunk of code and the comment describing same.
Thanks. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
