NP, the architecture is a red herring, since the reporter saw the problem in 64-bit land and I have now seen it on two different 32-bit compilations (OS/X (thanks for the explanation!) and Linux)
P. On 3/17/08, William Kyngesburye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mar 17, 2008, at 12:10 PM, Paul Ramsey wrote: > > >> Nope not yet; I'm still in the process of setting up various build > >> environments. Does OS X support "uname -a" to show exactly what > >> architecture > >> you are running on? > > > > Heron:~ pramsey$ uname -a > > Darwin Heron.local 9.2.0 Darwin Kernel Version 9.2.0: Tue Feb 5 > > 16:13:22 PST 2008; root:xnu-1228.3.13~1/RELEASE_I386 i386 > > > > Nothing definitive that I can see. I'm putting together a centos > > virtual box now to see if the test fails there too. > > > > OSX 10.5 is both 32bit and 64bit, but it also depends on the processor > - PPCs are all 64bit capable, but can run in 32bit mode (all previous > OSX and Classic versions do this), core duos on the first Intel models > are 32bit, core 2 duos are 64bit. The 10.5 system includes all of > these in one fat binary. > > BUT, a default compile on 10.5 builds 32bit binaries, so unless you > explicitly said to build 64bit, your Postgres and PostGIS are 32bit. > > Or, are you using my binaries? Those include 64bit and 32bit > binaries, and will run 64bit when possible. > > > I have a Postgres 8.2 x86_64 for OSX 10.5 on my Postgres page with > matching PostGIS 1.3.2, if you want to test it. I've upgraded my 10.5 > Mac to PG 8.3 already and don't have a spare to install 8.2. > > >> > > ----- > William Kyngesburye <kyngchaos*at*kyngchaos*dot*com> > http://www.kyngchaos.com/ > > "Oh, look, I seem to have fallen down a deep, dark hole. Now what > does that remind me of? Ah, yes - life." > > - Marvin > > > _______________________________________________ postgis-users mailing list [email protected] http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
