Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

if you execute 'select_gcc 3.1' as root it should change your default GCC to a compiler that works. That fixes the problems with -traditional-cpp v/s -no-cpp-precomp, but it doesn't fix: ld: Undefined symbol _tas eric ---(end of broadcast)--- TI

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

On Sep 27, 2003, at 3:43 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Eric Ridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I don't think the OS X 10.3 betas are readily available (I've payed to be in Apple's developer program), so if you don't have access to 10.3 but have some idea as to what would cause this problem with tas, I'll do

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

Eric B.Ridge wrote: On Sep 27, 2003, at 3:43 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Eric Ridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I don't think the OS X 10.3 betas are readily available (I've payed to be in Apple's developer program), so if you don't have access to 10.3 but have some idea as to what would cause this prob

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

"Eric B. Ridge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Were you ever able to figure out why 7.3.4 wouldn't build? Didn't really look, since the 7.4 inlined version of TAS is a better solution anyway. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

Marko Karppinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > While we're on a Mac-related note, I managed to compile PostgreSQL on > Mac OS X 10.2 Jaguar with two-level namespace support. > TwoLevelNamespaces.html> This is quite useful,

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

Eric Ridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I don't think the OS X 10.3 betas are readily available (I've payed to > be in Apple's developer program), so if you don't have access to 10.3 > but have some idea as to what would cause this problem with tas, I'll > do whatever I can to help test. I hav

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Peter, do you remember that? > BE_DLLLIBS; see Makefile.cygwin for example. (AIX has a similar > requirement, but handles it differently for bizarre reasons.) Right, thanks. > Personally, I think the two-level namespace feature is the opposite of

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

Tom Lane writes: > We used to have a similar requirement for some other platforms (AIX > I think), and there was a macro named something like BE_SHLIBS to > include the right platform-dependent stuff for such shlibs. Not sure > what happened to it. Peter, do you remember that? BE_DLLLIBS; see M

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

Marko Karppinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> 3. What's with the WITHOUT_DARWIN_BUNDLE_LOADER hack for ecpg? > The linker doesn't like symbols that are defined both in the shared > object > that's being linked and the bundle_loader binary. ecpg contains symbols > that are in the postgresql bina

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

On 23.9.2003, at 19:01, Tom Lane wrote: 1. Doesn't this break backward compatibility with Darwin 1.0-1.2? (If so, does anyone care anymore?) No. The two-level namespace feature was added in 10.1, and the -flat_namespace hack was included in pgsql to unbreak the compile on 10.1 and later. This

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

Marko Karppinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > While we're on a Mac-related note, I managed to compile PostgreSQL on > Mac OS X 10.2 Jaguar with two-level namespace support. > TwoLevelNamespaces.html> This is quite useful,

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

On Sep 21, 2003, at 9:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote: That makes no sense at all --- AFAICT there were *no* darwin or ppc specific changes between 7.3.2 and 7.3.4. Can you double check? Not really knowing what I'm doing, I took s_lock.c and s_lock.h from 7.4beta3, copied 'em into the 7.3.4 src tree, and r

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

On Sep 21, 2003, at 9:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Eric Ridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: any ideas here? 7.3.2 and 7.4beta3 compile just fine (I noticed that 7.4 has something more cross-platform for tas). What happened in 7.3.4 that broke it? That makes no sense at all --- AFAICT there were *no* da

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

Eric Ridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > any ideas here? 7.3.2 and 7.4beta3 compile just fine (I noticed that > 7.4 has something more cross-platform for tas). What happened in 7.3.4 > that broke it? That makes no sense at all --- AFAICT there were *no* darwin or ppc specific changes between 7

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

On Sep 21, 2003, at 3:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote: BTW, is anyone interested in looking into whether we can be made to build without using either flag? I tried it and saw a number of I did this... before I knew about -no-cpp-precomp. :( I read all about -traditional-cpp in the gcc man page, but cou

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

On Sep 21, 2003, at 3:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Great. I was afraid it might have been new with 10.2. Also, 7.3.4 doesn't link on the OS X 10.3 beta's. Apparently tas is never being defined. I could never fix this. In the list archives I found all sorts of references to tas()/TAS and older ve

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

Tom: BTW, is anyone interested in looking into whether we can be made to build without using either flag? I tried it and saw a number of failures that looked like they traced to incompatible macro expansion. This wouldn't surprise me if PG were some halfbaked package that only got tested with stoc

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

Marko Karppinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On lauantai, syys 20, 2003, at 23:37 Europe/Helsinki, Tom Lane wrote: >> Is anyone on the list still running OS X 10.1, or anyway still using a >> version of the OS X developer tools older than the Dec 2002 release? > -no-cpp-precomp replaced -traditio

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

On lauantai, syys 20, 2003, at 23:37 Europe/Helsinki, Tom Lane wrote: Is anyone on the list still running OS X 10.1, or anyway still using a version of the OS X developer tools older than the Dec 2002 release? It would be good to check if -no-cpp-precomp creates any problems on any release that any

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

Hunter Hillegas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I cannot build the latest release on OS X Jaguar. > Running GCC 3.3 from Apple: It seems "-traditional-cpp" has become nontraditional in 3.3. Or possibly Apple changed their system header files in a way that broke that preprocessor. What's certain is