Re: stat() vs cygwin - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dave Page
Subject Re: stat() vs cygwin
Date
Msg-id 937d27e10806240147v7e0c9f4fje8ca0a29b3a12646@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: stat() vs cygwin  (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>)
Responses Re: stat() vs cygwin  (Reini Urban <rurban@x-ray.at>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 9:32 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
> Yes.
>
> As in the cygwin build does build. Nobody really has verified if the fix
> is needed there. But frankly, if you are likely to care about the
> effects of this issue, you won't be running cygwin anyway. It's mostly a
> dead platform for postgresql anyway, AFAICS we only keep it building for
> legacy compatibility. Once it starts taking lots of resources to keep
> building (which it doesn't now), I think we should just drop it instead...

FWIW, the most recent packages from Cygwin themselves are 8.2.5.

-- 
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Magnus Hagander
Date:
Subject: Re: stat() vs cygwin
Next
From: "Heikki Linnakangas"
Date:
Subject: Re: Dept of ugly hacks: eliminating padding space in system indexes