Re: stat() vs cygwin

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Kenneth Marshall <ktm(at)rice(dot)edu>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: stat() vs cygwin
Date: 2008-06-24 13:35:06
Message-ID: 4860F80A.6090301@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Kenneth Marshall wrote:
>
>> One motivation for keeping it working on Cygwin, is that in some
>> environments it is not allowed to install native Windows apps but
>> they allow the use of the Cygwin environment. Of course if it takes
>> too many resources to support, then dropping support would be an
>> option. I would check this for you, but I am in the middle of moving
>> and my Windows/Cygwin box is not available right now.
>>
>
> Does anybody seriously have such a broken policy? I know a lot of places
> who have inverse policy, where they don't allow cygwin, but I've never
> heard of anybody refusing native programs and only allowing cygwin. Just
> like I've heard of no linux shops requiring that you run your database
> under wine...
>
>
>

This whole argument is pointless, ISTM. We are not in the business of
telling people what environment to use Postgres in.

Using Cygwin is still the best way I know of to use psql on Windows, and
it works just fine as a development environment.

By contrast, setting up a development environment for the native build
in either supported flavor is distinctly non-trivial.

(And yes I know about the problems Cygwin causes if you put it in the
System PATH. Don't do that.)

More to the point: I thought this had been tested. I will test it today
so we can put this whole thread to rest.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2008-06-24 13:39:22 Re: stat() vs cygwin
Previous Message Kenneth Marshall 2008-06-24 12:46:17 Re: stat() vs cygwin