From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org>
cc: Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>,
        jallen@americansavingslife.com, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT
In-reply-to: <1519501766.2510.13.camel@postgresql.org>
References: <151935568942.1461.14623890240535309745@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
 <1519483386.2654.291.camel@postgresql.org>
 <877er2nr8c.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk>
 <1519501766.2510.13.camel@postgresql.org>
Comments: In-reply-to Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org>
	message dated "Sat, 24 Feb 2018 20:49:26 +0100"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <20052.1519502594.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2018 15:03:14 -0500
Message-ID: <20053.1519502594@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org> writes:
>> Solution.pm has this:
>> ...
>> from which HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT seems to be suspiciously missing?

> Right, but it is missing in pg_config.h, too, right?

No, it does get defined on Unix builds (if appropriate), both in
pg_config.h and ecpg_config.h.  As far as I can see in a quick
grep, the core code doesn't use that symbol anywhere anyway ...
but ecpg does.  It's the fact that ecpg_config.h gets the
symbol defined on Unix builds but not MSVC builds that Andrew
is on about.

			regards, tom lane