Re: Path to PostgreSQL portabiliy

Joel Burton wrote:
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: markw(at)snoopy(dot)mohawksoft(dot)com [mailto:markw(at)snoopy(dot)mohawksoft(dot)com]On
> > Behalf Of mlw
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 11:47 AM
> > To: Joel Burton
> > Cc: Tom Lane; PostgreSQL-development; Jan Wieck; Marc G. Fournier; Dann
> > Corbit
> > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Path to PostgreSQL portabiliy
> >
> >
> > As I think of it, I don't think a cygwin PostgreSQL will *ever* be taken
> > seriously by the Windows crowd, just as a Wine/CorelDraw wasn't
> > taken seriously
> > by the Linux crowd.
> >
> > If we want to support Windows, we should support Windows. Cygwin
> > will not be
> > accepted by any serious IT team.
>
> Well, I think it's a bit different than Wine, a _huge_ binary trying to
> emulate every call of an operating system (and making things more than a bit
> slower).
>
> If there is a stripped down, out-of-the-box install that includes cygwin, do
> you think that will turn people off? It would be essentially invisible.

I was thinking about this earlier, one problem with cygwin is it doesn't act
like a Windows program, it requires its own file layout.

Cygwin's purpose in life to to allow basically UNIX centric people to be
comfortable on Windows. It, by no means, is anything that a Windows centric
person wants to deal with, or would deal with if there were an alternative.