Thread: FW: Re: [PATCHES] Ant configuration
I meant to send this to the group... -----FW: <XFMail.20011019104543.ned.wolpert@knowledgenet.com>----- Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 10:45:43 -0700 (MST) Sender: wolpert@wolpert.knowledgenet.corp From: Ned Wolpert <ned.wolpert@knowledgenet.com> To: Barry Lind <barry@xythos.com> Subject: Re: [JDBC] [PATCHES] Ant configuration -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Two cents with of thought... :-) On 18-Oct-2001 Barry Lind wrote: >> * People with Java background probably know Ant better that >> 'make'. Ant seems to become 'build tool of choice' in >> Java world. > > Perhaps, but I'm not convinced that either of these arguments is true. > I have seen make used by more projects than ant, and a developer > building postgres from source, certainly needs to be familiar with make. Ant is great in a pure-java project. I have seen ant used as the primary build engine in many Java projects, and it works great for me. But, here are some (conflicting) thoughts. 1) To some degree, the make process of PostgreSQL should be consistant. Ant and Make are two seperate building systems. Its easier to put the JDBC driver into make than it is to put postgresql into ant. 2) Correct me if I'm wrong, but currently, Make is needed to run Ant in the JDBC driver anyways, right? (To grab the version numbers and set the properties when running ant) Yet... 3) Java is system independant, and the JDBC driver is a client piece. I should be able to compile the JDBC driver outside of PostgreSQL server if I wanted to, right? Example, I can't compile PostgreSQL on windozes 95. But I could compile the JDBC driver via ant if Java and ant are installed. (Or, rather, I should be able to) 4) Ant doesn't need to be 'installed' in other projects. Rather, they include the needed ant libs in the CVS, which is allowed by the license, and create a build script to call the ant process to build. (Usually a build.sh and a build.bat) We could do that to also set the version numbers rather than have make do it. I guess I can make an argument either way. The real way to answer this is to ask if one cares if you can build the JDBC driver on window's only platform without cygwin installed. -If the answer is no, that one wouldn't build the JDBC driver without building the rest of postgresql, then the build process should be tied to make, like the rest of postgresql, for simplisity in maintence. -However, if the JDBC driver should be able to be built without having to build postgresql, (on platforms without UNIX-compatiablity layer like cygwin) for client use only, then yes, use Ant to achive platform-independance. I'm lucky enough to only work with Linux, so I don't really care on the outcome of this :-) I can work with either. Virtually, Ned Wolpert <ned.wolpert@knowledgenet.com> D08C2F45: 28E7 56CB 58AC C622 5A51 3C42 8B2B 2739 D08C 2F45 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE70GbGiysnOdCML0URAnl5AJ9VkJs0QXr1GEzzFVxW5CzNLDRl1wCfbOmM O2tENKYPCsDAx6I42NoYh5U= =CSwI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------End of forwarded message-------------------------
> I guess I can make an argument either way. The real way to answer this is to > ask if one cares if you can build the JDBC driver on window's only platform > without cygwin installed. > > -If the answer is no, that one wouldn't build the JDBC driver without building > the rest of postgresql, then the build process should be tied to make, like > the rest of postgresql, for simplisity in maintence. > > -However, if the JDBC driver should be able to be built without having to > build postgresql, (on platforms without UNIX-compatiablity layer like cygwin) > for client use only, then yes, use Ant to achive platform-independance. One significant issue here is that unlike our other binaries, the JAR files run on any platform so they don't really need to compile in MS Win. They can just download it from a web site or we could ship the jdbc JAR ourselves. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 19-Oct-2001 Bruce Momjian wrote: > One significant issue here is that unlike our other binaries, the JAR > files run on any platform so they don't really need to compile in MS > Win. They can just download it from a web site or we could ship the > jdbc JAR ourselves. True. I was really looking at it from those who wanted to build the jar from source. If we make the jarfile available from the website, that's good for the PostgreSQL releases, but it may not help those who want/need the JDBC driver updated from CVS. Virtually, Ned Wolpert <ned.wolpert@knowledgenet.com> D08C2F45: 28E7 56CB 58AC C622 5A51 3C42 8B2B 2739 D08C 2F45 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE70LuNiysnOdCML0URAn2tAJwOg8HpKskzyVvwucubAJ8/teXMgwCdENc1 Siu6Fx305Zh69RG5+U/Vbx4= =SXet -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
* Ned Wolpert <ned.wolpert@knowledgenet.com> wrote: | > Win. They can just download it from a web site or we could ship the | > jdbc JAR ourselves. | | True. I was really looking at it from those who wanted to build the jar from | source. If we make the jarfile available from the website, that's good for the | PostgreSQL releases, but it may not help those who want/need the JDBC driver | updated from CVS. And it doesn't help potential _JDBC driver_ developers sitting on Windows platforms either. But me too is usually all Linux or Solaris, but I'm just trying to illuminate the issues. -- Gunnar Rønning - gunnar@polygnosis.com Senior Consultant, Polygnosis AS, http://www.polygnosis.com/
Ned Wolpert writes: > 3) Java is system independant, and the JDBC driver is a client piece. I should > be able to compile the JDBC driver outside of PostgreSQL server if I wanted to, > right? Example, I can't compile PostgreSQL on windozes 95. But I could > compile the JDBC driver via ant if Java and ant are installed. (Or, rather, I > should be able to) You can also install GNU make on Windows. -- Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net http://funkturm.homeip.net/~peter
* Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote: | | > compile the JDBC driver via ant if Java and ant are installed. (Or, rather, I | > should be able to) | | You can also install GNU make on Windows. This is how we used to build or apps on Windows before Ant, but we portability issues with respect to scripts invoked from make is a PITA, IMHO ;-) Seriously would installing GNU Make be enough, or would you need to install Cygwin and other packages as well ? Has anybody tested this ? I suspect that something like that would not work painless. -- Gunnar Rønning - gunnar@polygnosis.com Senior Consultant, Polygnosis AS, http://www.polygnosis.com/
If we can include the ANT libraries in our CVS then my objection to ANT (requiring users to trackdown and download ANT) goes away, and I would then suggest we continue to use ANT for the other reasons you mention. Does anyone know if we could include ANT into our CVS and redistribute it in order to build the jdbc code? Are their license incompatibilities between the Apache License and the PostgreSQL license that would prevent this? thanks, --Barry Ned Wolpert wrote: > I meant to send this to the group... > > -----FW: <XFMail.20011019104543.ned.wolpert@knowledgenet.com>----- > > Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 10:45:43 -0700 (MST) > Sender: wolpert@wolpert.knowledgenet.corp > From: Ned Wolpert <ned.wolpert@knowledgenet.com> > To: Barry Lind <barry@xythos.com> > Subject: Re: [JDBC] [PATCHES] Ant configuration > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Two cents with of thought... :-) > > On 18-Oct-2001 Barry Lind wrote: > >>>* People with Java background probably know Ant better that >>> 'make'. Ant seems to become 'build tool of choice' in >>> Java world. >>> >>Perhaps, but I'm not convinced that either of these arguments is true. >>I have seen make used by more projects than ant, and a developer >>building postgres from source, certainly needs to be familiar with make. >> > > Ant is great in a pure-java project. I have seen ant used as the primary > build engine in many Java projects, and it works great for me. But, here are > some (conflicting) thoughts. > > 1) To some degree, the make process of PostgreSQL should be consistant. Ant > and Make are two seperate building systems. Its easier to put the JDBC driver > into make than it is to put postgresql into ant. > > 2) Correct me if I'm wrong, but currently, Make is needed to run Ant in the > JDBC driver anyways, right? (To grab the version numbers and set the properties > when running ant) > > Yet... > > 3) Java is system independant, and the JDBC driver is a client piece. I should > be able to compile the JDBC driver outside of PostgreSQL server if I wanted to, > right? Example, I can't compile PostgreSQL on windozes 95. But I could > compile the JDBC driver via ant if Java and ant are installed. (Or, rather, I > should be able to) > > 4) Ant doesn't need to be 'installed' in other projects. Rather, they include > the needed ant libs in the CVS, which is allowed by the license, and create a > build script to call the ant process to build. (Usually a build.sh and a > build.bat) We could do that to also set the version numbers rather than have > make do it. > > I guess I can make an argument either way. The real way to answer this is to > ask if one cares if you can build the JDBC driver on window's only platform > without cygwin installed. > > -If the answer is no, that one wouldn't build the JDBC driver without building > the rest of postgresql, then the build process should be tied to make, like > the rest of postgresql, for simplisity in maintence. > > -However, if the JDBC driver should be able to be built without having to > build postgresql, (on platforms without UNIX-compatiablity layer like cygwin) > for client use only, then yes, use Ant to achive platform-independance. > > I'm lucky enough to only work with Linux, so I don't really care on the outcome > of this :-) I can work with either. > > > Virtually, > Ned Wolpert <ned.wolpert@knowledgenet.com> > > D08C2F45: 28E7 56CB 58AC C622 5A51 3C42 8B2B 2739 D08C 2F45 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org > > iD8DBQE70GbGiysnOdCML0URAnl5AJ9VkJs0QXr1GEzzFVxW5CzNLDRl1wCfbOmM > O2tENKYPCsDAx6I42NoYh5U= > =CSwI > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > --------------End of forwarded message------------------------- > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command > (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org) > >
> If we can include the ANT libraries in our CVS then my > objection to ANT (requiring users to trackdown and download ANT) goes > away, and I would then suggest we continue to use ANT for the other > reasons you mention. > > Does anyone know if we could include ANT into our CVS and redistribute > it in order to build the jdbc code? Are their license incompatibilities > between the Apache License and the PostgreSQL license that would prevent > this? I don't think we want to go there. Too much bloat to add it. Looks like 600k. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
Barry Lind <barry@xythos.com> writes:
> If we can include the ANT libraries in our CVS then my
> objection to ANT (requiring users to trackdown and download ANT) goes
> away, and I would then suggest we continue to use ANT for the other
> reasons you mention.
The sheer bulk of the ANT libraries rules that out, even if there
weren't a management/synchronization issue: do you want a PG release to
be using an older ANT than what you have already installed locally?
On the other hand, I can see no reason why we shouldn't say that you
*must* have ANT installed to build the JDBC driver. You've gotta have
Java to build JDBC, no? Seems like ANT is just one more dependency,
and hardly an unreasonable one if it's the standard for Java projects.
What's wrong with saying "we don't build the JDBC driver if ANT isn't
installed"?
regards, tom lane
Just a thought. Why not separate postgres and postgres jdbc in that case? Jayesh > -----Original Message----- > From: Bruce Momjian [SMTP:pgman@candle.pha.pa.us] > Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 5:56 PM > To: Barry Lind > Cc: pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [JDBC] FW: Re: [PATCHES] Ant configuration > > > If we can include the ANT libraries in our CVS then my > > objection to ANT (requiring users to trackdown and download ANT) > goes > > away, and I would then suggest we continue to use ANT for the other > > reasons you mention. > > > > Does anyone know if we could include ANT into our CVS and > redistribute > > it in order to build the jdbc code? Are their license > incompatibilities > > between the Apache License and the PostgreSQL license that would > prevent > > this? > > I don't think we want to go there. Too much bloat to add it. Looks > like 600k. > > -- > Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us > pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 > + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue > + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania > 19026 > > ---------------------------(end of > broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Barry Lind writes: > If we can include the ANT libraries in our CVS then my > objection to ANT (requiring users to trackdown and download ANT) goes > away, and I would then suggest we continue to use ANT for the other > reasons you mention. My problem with Ant isn't primarily the availability or what's standard or not. My problem is simply that it doesn't work the way I want the build system to work (see recently listed issues such as exit status and multiple build dirs). If we can get these fixed then I have no problem, but otherwise Ant introduces bugs into the build system and those will be fixed, no matter what's the standard today. -- Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net http://funkturm.homeip.net/~peter
Tom, My reasons for not wanting to depend on Ant are: Many binary distributions of Postgres are not including the JDBC code because of the added overhead of the jdbc build process (i.e. getting Ant installed). Users have complained to the mail lists in the past about the requirement for Ant (they expect make; make install to work for jdbc just like it does for the rest of the postgres). (However I realize there are equally good arguments on why depending on Ant is a good thing.) Thus I thought a good compromise was to include the Ant libraries in postgres for building, however after seeing the size of them, I agree that is clearly not an option. Your rationale with regards to "since you require java to build, what is one more dependency" is a little flawed. The java dependency is both a build time and runtime dependency. In order to use the result of the build you need java so the expectation that you will have java if you are dealing with jdbc is high (otherwise why would you bother). However the dependency on Ant is only for building. The one thing this thread has made abundantly clear for me it that we are far from agreement on what the ideal solution is (and there probably isn't an ideal solution), thus I feel we should stick with status quo for 7.2 and deal with all of this in a few months after 7.2 is production. thanks, --Barry Tom Lane wrote: > Barry Lind <barry@xythos.com> writes: > >>If we can include the ANT libraries in our CVS then my >>objection to ANT (requiring users to trackdown and download ANT) goes >>away, and I would then suggest we continue to use ANT for the other >>reasons you mention. >> > > The sheer bulk of the ANT libraries rules that out, even if there > weren't a management/synchronization issue: do you want a PG release to > be using an older ANT than what you have already installed locally? > > On the other hand, I can see no reason why we shouldn't say that you > *must* have ANT installed to build the JDBC driver. You've gotta have > Java to build JDBC, no? Seems like ANT is just one more dependency, > and hardly an unreasonable one if it's the standard for Java projects. > > What's wrong with saying "we don't build the JDBC driver if ANT isn't > installed"? > > regards, tom lane > >
Gunnar Rønning writes: > Seriously would installing GNU Make be enough, or would you need to install > Cygwin and other packages as well ? GNU make runs natively on Windows. -- Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net http://funkturm.homeip.net/~peter
> If we can include the ANT libraries in our CVS then my > objection to ANT (requiring users to trackdown and download ANT) goes > away, and I would then suggest we continue to use ANT for the other > reasons you mention. > > Does anyone know if we could include ANT into our CVS and > redistribute > it in order to build the jdbc code? Are their license > incompatibilities > between the Apache License and the PostgreSQL license that > would prevent > this? Should be fine to do, as long as we include the Apache license that comes with Ant along with the distribution. Point 3 of the license states that we should add something like: "This product includes software developed by the Apache Software Foundation..." in the documentation too; I'm not sure if this is really necessary with Ant as its a build tool, but couldn't hurt I guess. Cheers, Joe > > thanks, > --Barry > > > Ned Wolpert wrote: > > > I meant to send this to the group... > > > > -----FW: <XFMail.20011019104543.ned.wolpert@knowledgenet.com>----- > > > > Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 10:45:43 -0700 (MST) > > Sender: wolpert@wolpert.knowledgenet.corp > > From: Ned Wolpert <ned.wolpert@knowledgenet.com> > > To: Barry Lind <barry@xythos.com> > > Subject: Re: [JDBC] [PATCHES] Ant configuration > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > Two cents with of thought... :-) > > > > On 18-Oct-2001 Barry Lind wrote: > > > >>>* People with Java background probably know Ant better that > >>> 'make'. Ant seems to become 'build tool of choice' in > >>> Java world. > >>> > >>Perhaps, but I'm not convinced that either of these > arguments is true. > >>I have seen make used by more projects than ant, and a developer > >>building postgres from source, certainly needs to be > familiar with make. > >> > > > > Ant is great in a pure-java project. I have seen ant used > as the primary > > build engine in many Java projects, and it works great for > me. But, here are > > some (conflicting) thoughts. > > > > 1) To some degree, the make process of PostgreSQL should be > consistant. Ant > > and Make are two seperate building systems. Its easier to > put the JDBC driver > > into make than it is to put postgresql into ant. > > > > 2) Correct me if I'm wrong, but currently, Make is needed > to run Ant in the > > JDBC driver anyways, right? (To grab the version numbers > and set the properties > > when running ant) > > > > Yet... > > > > 3) Java is system independant, and the JDBC driver is a > client piece. I should > > be able to compile the JDBC driver outside of PostgreSQL > server if I wanted to, > > right? Example, I can't compile PostgreSQL on windozes 95. > But I could > > compile the JDBC driver via ant if Java and ant are > installed. (Or, rather, I > > should be able to) > > > > 4) Ant doesn't need to be 'installed' in other projects. > Rather, they include > > the needed ant libs in the CVS, which is allowed by the > license, and create a > > build script to call the ant process to build. (Usually a > build.sh and a > > build.bat) We could do that to also set the version numbers > rather than have > > make do it. > > > > I guess I can make an argument either way. The real way to > answer this is to > > ask if one cares if you can build the JDBC driver on > window's only platform > > without cygwin installed. > > > > -If the answer is no, that one wouldn't build the JDBC > driver without building > > the rest of postgresql, then the build process should be > tied to make, like > > the rest of postgresql, for simplisity in maintence. > > > > -However, if the JDBC driver should be able to be built > without having to > > build postgresql, (on platforms without > UNIX-compatiablity layer like cygwin) > > for client use only, then yes, use Ant to achive > platform-independance. > > > > I'm lucky enough to only work with Linux, so I don't really > care on the outcome > > of this :-) I can work with either. > > > > > > Virtually, > > Ned Wolpert <ned.wolpert@knowledgenet.com> > > > > D08C2F45: 28E7 56CB 58AC C622 5A51 3C42 8B2B 2739 D08C 2F45 > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) > > Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org > > > > iD8DBQE70GbGiysnOdCML0URAnl5AJ9VkJs0QXr1GEzzFVxW5CzNLDRl1wCfbOmM > > O2tENKYPCsDAx6I42NoYh5U= > > =CSwI > > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > > --------------End of forwarded message------------------------- > > > > ---------------------------(end of > broadcast)--------------------------- > > TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command > > (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to > majordomo@postgresql.org) > > > > > > > > ---------------------------(end of > broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? > > http://archives.postgresql.org > ***********Confidentiality/Limited Liability Statement*************** Have the latest business news and in depth analysis delivered to your desktop. Subscribe to "Insights", Deloitte's fortnightly email business bulletin . . . http://www.deloitte.com.au/preferences/preference.asp This message contains privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you must not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this message in error, please notify Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu immediately. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Deloitte. The liability of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, is limited by, and to the extent of, the Accountants' Scheme under the Professional Standards Act 1994 (NSW).
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 23-Oct-2001 Jayesh K. Parayali wrote: > Just a thought. Why not separate postgres and postgres jdbc in that > case? To be honest, this is the one thing I want to avoid if possible. Its important that the postgres build system builds the 'official' interfaces as well, since it keeps the two connect tightly. I prefer to use ant to build Java code, but to be honest, I really just want to be able to type either of the following, in the src/interfaces/jdbc directory: ant jar or make jar Both should give the same results. (Its kinda silly that the current technique has 'make' call 'ant', but anyways...) The only two issues are multiple build tools and ease for building the jdbc driver for non-UNIX users. And to be more honest, I think we've spent too much time on this as is. If we can't decide as a group, we should either a) vote on it (Least the CVS committers should) or b) leave it for now. Either way, I'm going to stay out of this discussion for now. Virtually, Ned Wolpert <ned.wolpert@knowledgenet.com> D08C2F45: 28E7 56CB 58AC C622 5A51 3C42 8B2B 2739 D08C 2F45 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE71bdxiysnOdCML0URAoXlAJ4w6Nd9pXuCoJAawEpxBaE/DADsRwCfS0dK tjPvtMsIWudhz641Ro12SgE= =/uGM -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
* Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote: | | > Seriously would installing GNU Make be enough, or would you need to install | > Cygwin and other packages as well ? | | GNU make runs natively on Windows. I know and I've used GNU Make when working with Windows, but that taught me that you often need alot more than GNU Make to port a makefile to Windows. Maybe maintaining two versions would be the best, ie. Make is used when building the distribution and Ant makefiles are provided for the convenience of users that think Ant works better. Then you could probably setup some very simple Makefile without full dependency graph(if you want that you need rely on a tool like jikes to generate it for you). That basically means that you need to recompile all *.java files when you have edited one Java file. -- Gunnar Rønning - gunnar@polygnosis.com Senior Consultant, Polygnosis AS, http://www.polygnosis.com/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 23-Oct-2001 Shevland, Joseph (AU - Hobart) wrote: >> Does anyone know if we could include ANT into our CVS and >> redistribute it in order to build the jdbc code? Are their license >> incompatibilities between the Apache License and the PostgreSQL license >> that would prevent this? > > Should be fine to do, as long as we include the Apache license that comes > with Ant along with the distribution. Point 3 of the license states that we > should add something like: > > "This product includes software developed by the Apache Software > Foundation..." > > in the documentation too; I'm not sure if this is really necessary with Ant > as its a build tool, but couldn't hurt I guess. No, we're using the ant tool, not incorporating ant into our executable(s). We only need the license in the cvs part that includes ant. Virtually, Ned Wolpert <ned.wolpert@knowledgenet.com> D08C2F45: 28E7 56CB 58AC C622 5A51 3C42 8B2B 2739 D08C 2F45 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE71fntiysnOdCML0URAitbAJsFE56VzukAAjnMlHKgHHRW039lYwCdFEYc Jat/lyrxApC7uDZoIFHJrq0= =sAWr -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Added to TODO:
o Move to using 'make' rather than 'ant'(?)
At least we know it is an issue for final decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> On 23-Oct-2001 Jayesh K. Parayali wrote:
> > Just a thought. Why not separate postgres and postgres jdbc in that
> > case?
>
> To be honest, this is the one thing I want to avoid if possible. Its important
> that the postgres build system builds the 'official' interfaces as well, since
> it keeps the two connect tightly.
>
> I prefer to use ant to build Java code, but to be honest, I really just want to
> be able to type either of the following, in the src/interfaces/jdbc directory:
>
> ant jar
> or
> make jar
>
> Both should give the same results. (Its kinda silly that the current technique
> has 'make' call 'ant', but anyways...) The only two issues are multiple build
> tools and ease for building the jdbc driver for non-UNIX users.
>
> And to be more honest, I think we've spent too much time on this as is. If we
> can't decide as a group, we should either a) vote on it (Least the CVS
> committers should) or b) leave it for now. Either way, I'm going to stay out
> of this discussion for now.
>
>
> Virtually,
> Ned Wolpert <ned.wolpert@knowledgenet.com>
>
> D08C2F45: 28E7 56CB 58AC C622 5A51 3C42 8B2B 2739 D08C 2F45
-- End of PGP signed section.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
> Gunnar R?nning writes: > > > Seriously would installing GNU Make be enough, or would you need to install > > Cygwin and other packages as well ? > > GNU make runs natively on Windows. We do allow ODBC to be built natively on MS Windows. Does that require gmake or can it use native MSWin buildfiles? I see win32.mak but that looks like a standard Makefile. If we require gmake on Win32 to build ODBC, can't we require it for jdbc? -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026