Florian G. Pflug f...@phlo.org writes:
configure fails to recognize long as a working 64-bit type because the
does_int64_work configure test produces warning due to a missing return
value declaration for main() and a missing prototype for
does_int64_work(). (Aain, those warning are turned into
On 15.12.09 16:02 , Tom Lane wrote:
Florian G. Pflugf...@phlo.org writes:
configure fails to recognize long as a working 64-bit type
because the does_int64_work configure test produces warning due to
a missing return value declaration for main() and a missing
prototype for does_int64_work().
On 12/15/09, Florian G. Pflug f...@phlo.org wrote:
On 15.12.09 16:02 , Tom Lane wrote:
Florian G. Pflugf...@phlo.org writes:
configure fails to recognize long as a working 64-bit type
because the does_int64_work configure test produces warning due to
a missing return value
On tis, 2009-12-15 at 16:15 +0100, Florian G. Pflug wrote:
Alternatively - is there a way to use -Werror only for building the
actual sources, not the configure tests? I didn't find one, but my
autoconf-fu is pretty limited...
I always build with
pgmake='make COPT=-Werror -Wno-inline'
(The
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
I have also tried in the past to pass -Werror through configure, but
that caused too many problems.
Is it your opinion that we shouldn't bother fixing this particular
test? I was on the fence about it myself. I don't want to promise
that configuring
On 12/15/09, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
I have also tried in the past to pass -Werror through configure, but
that caused too many problems.
Is it your opinion that we shouldn't bother fixing this particular
test? I was on the fence
On tis, 2009-12-15 at 16:22 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
I have also tried in the past to pass -Werror through configure, but
that caused too many problems.
Is it your opinion that we shouldn't bother fixing this particular
test? I was on the fence
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
So to summarize, this is just a bad idea. Creating a less obscure way
to use -Werror might be worthwhile, though.
I suppose we could add --with-Werror but it seems pretty specialized
to me. A more appropriate solution would allow the user to provide
On 15.12.09 23:38 , Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentrautpete...@gmx.net writes:
So to summarize, this is just a bad idea. Creating a less obscure
way to use -Werror might be worthwhile, though.
I suppose we could add --with-Werror but it seems pretty
specialized to me. A more appropriate
