Re: Request for a "force interactive mode" flag (-I) for

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: John DeSoi <desoi(at)pgedit(dot)com>, Bill Bartlett <bbartlett(at)meridianemr(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Request for a "force interactive mode" flag (-I) for
Date: 2005-10-14 15:04:51
Message-ID: 434FC913.40807@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


>>http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-04/threads.php
>>
>>It seems pretty simple and non-invasive. I don't recall seeing the
>>reasons against doing it.
>>
>>
>
>We need a large number of users who need something before we add it. If
>we didn't we would have a mess of options.
>
>
The need seems like the exception rather than the norm. The posts that I
see are people
trying to use Unix tools, in Windows. I am not talking about the use of
psql, rather things
like the use of Cygwin and rxvt. Although it is nice when we can do
that, it should
be consider unsupported.

If you really want the environment, use RDP, VNC, or Citrix and start a
shell as normal.
Alternatively just use PostgreSQL with SSL and then connect from a
remote psql terminal.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

--
Your PostgreSQL solutions company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Programming, 24x7 support
Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting
Co-Authors: plPHP, plPerlNG - http://www.commandprompt.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Page 2005-10-14 15:13:12 Re: pg_config --pgxs on Win32
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2005-10-14 15:00:59 Re: Request for a 'force interactive mode' flag (-I) for