Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 07:49:33 -0500 From: Jason Tishler To: Charles Wilson Cc: Horak Daniel , cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: [ANN][RFC] cygipc-1.11 at cygutils Message-ID: <20011203074933.C2808@dothill.com> Mail-Followup-To: Charles Wilson , Horak Daniel , cygwin@cygwin.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3C067330.8000802@ece.gatech.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.18i Chuck, [Sorry for the sluggish response time...] On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 12:41:04PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote: > Horak Daniel wrote: > > > > What does postgresql do if there is no system-wide union semun? > > > > There is a check for union semun in configure and then if it does not > > find a system wide union semun it defines its own as > > > > [snip] > Ah, then cygipc-1.11 won't work for postgresql. Cygwin (and Linux) > implementations of IPC need a fourth union memeber, > [snip] > This sounds like a vote for 'return to 1.10 behavior'. Any other comments? I just tried the simplistic approach: configure, make, make check. PostgreSQL 7.1.3 builds cleanly and passes all regression tests. So it seems that cygipc 1.11 is still compatible with PostgreSQL. Thanks, Jason -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/