On 01/21/2011 05:24 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>
>> That advice needs to be taken with a grain or two of salt. First, while you
>> probably should not use Cygwin postgres as a production server, it is still
>> the best way to run psql on Windows that I know of. And second, the stuff
> Yeah, I agree for psql the client tool (though it used to suck badly
> if you were in a non-english locale, but they may have fixed that).
> But not for PostgreSQL the full product. I guess we could add a
> sentence about the client side, but it needs to be clear that the
> non-sucky part only applies to the client.
It's not so bad it can't be used for development, and I have known
people who do that, and indeed I have deployed one very complex app
developed in just that way.
More importantly from my POV, there is no support in the buildfarm for
just building the client side, and I have no intention of providing it.
So it's not insignificant for us to be able to continue supporting a
complete build on Cygwin, however much you dislike it.
>
>> about not being able to generate 64-bit binaries with Mingw is no longer
>> true (that's why it's no longer called Mingw32), although it is true that
>> nobody I know has yet tried to do so. It's on my long TODO list, and well
>> worth doing. (Relying on one compiler is the techno equivalent of
>> monolingualism, which my sister's bumper sticker used to tell me is a
>> curable condition.)
> It's true from the perspective of *postgresql* - you can't use those
> compiler to generate 64-bit binaries of PostgreSQL. And it's referring
> to "these builds", not the compiler itself.
>
> And I'm certainly not going to stand in the way of somebody adding
> build support for it if they (you or others) want to spend time on it
> - that patch should just include an update to that documentation
> paragraph, of course.
>
> Personally, I'm going to put what time I can put into "windows build
> system updates" into making us work with VS 2010 because I find that
> more important - but that's just me personally.
>
VS2010 is important, no doubt. But clearly there's some demand for
continued Mingw support, hence the OP's question.
As I've remarked before, I think we should support as many build
platforms/environments as we can.
cheers
andrew
