Re: Win32 defines - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: Win32 defines
Date
Msg-id 20030405174929.GA3362@dcc.uchile.cl
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Win32 defines  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Win32 defines
List pgsql-patches
On Sat, Apr 05, 2003 at 12:38:51PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Neil Conway wrote:
>
> > If we finish the native Win32 port, is there any need to keep the cygwin
> > stuff around?
>
> They do ship PostgreSQL with cygwin, so we may need to keep it around,
> at least for a few releases, and it isn't that big a port.

Surely there's no need for a less performant, less reliable Cygwin port
when a native Win32 one is available?  If they ship it now, they
probably won't need to later when the Win32 port is finished.  Cygwin is
already said to be "experimental" or non-commercial quality, AFAIR.

Not that I care though...

--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>)
Y una voz del caos me hablo y me dijo
"Sonrie y se feliz, podria ser peor".
Y sonrei. Y fui feliz.
Y fue peor.


pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Win32 defines
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Win32 defines