Comparing the lists of functions exported by libpq and those declared
by libpq-fe.h turns up a fair number of descrepancies. Most of these
functions are declared by internal header files. For clarity I think we
should clarify the situation, either explicity declare them for
external users, or stop
Martijn van Oosterhout kleptog@svana.org writes:
Comparing the lists of functions exported by libpq and those declared
by libpq-fe.h turns up a fair number of descrepancies. Most of these
functions are declared by internal header files. For clarity I think we
should clarify the situation,
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 12:47:39PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Martijn van Oosterhout kleptog@svana.org writes:
Comparing the lists of functions exported by libpq and those declared
by libpq-fe.h turns up a fair number of descrepancies. Most of these
functions are declared by internal header
Martijn van Oosterhout kleptog@svana.org writes:
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 12:47:39PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Already done no? (at least on the platforms where we know how to
restrict it)
These functions are all in the exports.txt. I was just wondering if we
wanted to cut that list down any
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 03:21:56PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
AFAIK, everything that is in exports.txt was put there for a reason.
I'm happy with the situation as it stands (other than wanting to enforce
the exports.txt restriction on more platforms ...)
In that case, shouldn't we add to
Martijn van Oosterhout kleptog@svana.org writes:
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 03:21:56PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
AFAIK, everything that is in exports.txt was put there for a reason.
I'm happy with the situation as it stands (other than wanting to enforce
the exports.txt restriction on more platforms
