Hi I am not so familiar with the PostgreSQL development team, but using a MinGW compatible client side is important to us, so I'd like to start doing it myself if any of you experts can help.
Cheers Xiaobo Gu > -----邮件原件----- > 发件人: Andrew Dunstan [mailto:and...@dunslane.net] > 发送时间: 2011年1月21日 23:25 > 收件人: Magnus Hagander > 抄送: Robert Haas; XiaoboGu; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org > 主题: Re: [HACKERS] Is there a way to build PostgreSQL client libraries with MinGW > > > > 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 -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
