Re: [PATCH] Better way to check for getaddrinfo function.

That was very much situation specific.
But the bottomline is the default test does not include <netdb.h> in the
test code.
So, pg uses getaddrinfo.c.And the getaddrinfo.c does not work for me.
Ipv6 client authenciation fails.

I have modified the patch.

$ diff -r configure.in configure.in.new
918a919
> AC_MSG_CHECKING([for getaddrinfo])
920c921,926
< AC_REPLACE_FUNCS([getaddrinfo])
---
> AC_TRY_LINK([#include <netdb.h> #include <assert.h>],
> [char (*f)();f=getaddrinfo;],
> ac_cv_func_getaddrinfo=yes, ac_cv_func_getaddrinfo=no)
> if test x"$ac_cv_func_getaddrinfo" = xyes; then
> AC_DEFINE(HAVE_GETADDRINFO,1,[Define if you have the getaddrinfo
function])
> fi
923a930
> AC_MSG_RESULT([$ac_cv_func_getaddrinfo])

Rajesh R
--
This space intentionally left non-blank.

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2006 11:28 PM
To: R, Rajesh (STSD)
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org; pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] [PATCH] Better way to check for getaddrinfo
function.

"R, Rajesh (STSD)" <rajesh(dot)r2(at)hp(dot)com> writes:
> Just thought that the following patch might improve checking for
> getaddrinfo function (in configure.in)

Since AC_TRY_RUN tests cannot work in cross-compilation scenarios, you
need an *extremely* good reason to put one in. "I thought this might
improve things" doesn't qualify. Exactly what problem are you trying to
solve and why is a run-time test necessary? Why doesn't the existing
coding work for you?

regards, tom lane <<configure-in.patch>>