Applied.
---
Chris Browne wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/opt/OXRS/sources/pgsql-HEAD/doc$ cvs diff -u FAQ_AIX
Index: FAQ_AIX
===
RCS file:
Patch applied. Thanks.
Backpatched to 8.1.X.
---
Chris Browne wrote:
Some of this may have already made it in; it's not totally clear...
At any rate, here's a revision to CVS HEAD to reflect some changes by
myself
Patch applied to CVS HEAD and 8.1.X. Thanks.
---
Seneca Cunningham wrote:
FAQ_AIX in 8.1.0 contains outdated information about how to deal with
postgres problems due to readline. The attached patch replaces that
Patch applied. Thanks.
---
Chris Browne wrote:
We haven't seen any agreement emerge as to what is causing AIX 5.3 ML3
to fail to successfully build the release candidates.
However, a patch has emerged (thanks,
Chris Browne wrote:
We haven't seen any agreement emerge as to what is causing AIX 5.3 ML3
to fail to successfully build the release candidates.
However, a patch has emerged (thanks, Seneca!) that does allow it to
work, and which I'd expect to be portable (better still!).
We are still
Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
Chris Browne wrote:
We haven't seen any agreement emerge as to what is causing AIX 5.3 ML3
to fail to successfully build the release candidates.
However, a patch has emerged (thanks, Seneca!) that does allow it to
work, and which I'd expect to be portable
Chris Browne wrote:
We haven't seen any agreement emerge as to what is causing AIX 5.3 ML3
to fail to successfully build the release candidates.
However, a patch has emerged (thanks, Seneca!) that does allow it to
work, and which I'd expect to be portable (better still!).
We are still
Christopher Browne wrote:
Actually, there is a reason NOT to apply the patch in general on all
platforms; it introduces logic (an if {} else {} statement) in a place
where there wasn't previously one, which *presumably* slows things
down somewhat. I don't know if the memcpy() calls are
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Of course, the patch is more than somewhat strange anyway. I don't think
it should be applied unless we actually know what's going on.
Yeah. Just the first question it raises is: what else is broken,
and where?
regards, tom
Patch applied. Thanks.
---
Chris Browne wrote:
IBM has addressed the socket address storage issue as of AIX 5.3
maintenance level 5300-03; the following patch adds documentation to
FAQ_AIX...
[EMAIL
10 matches
Mail list logo