> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hans-Jürgen Schönig [mailto:postgres@cybertec.at] 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 10:54 PM
> To: Brian Bruns; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [mail] Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port patches submitted
> 
> 
> Brian Bruns wrote:
> 
> >Problem is, nobody builds packages on windows anyway.  They just all
> >download the binary a guy (usually literally "one guy") 
> built.  So, let's 
> >just make sure that one guy has cygwin loaded on his machine 
> and we'll be 
> >all set. </tougue in cheek>
> >  
> >
> 
> Correct.
> I wonder why we need a Windows port.

Maybe because most of the machines in the world (by a titanic landslide) are Windoze boxes.

> I think it is more pain 
> than sense. In case of Windows I'd rely on a binary 
> distribution and a piece of 
> documentation telling how the source can be built. 

Sounds like a Windows port to me.  How is this "Windows build" going to be created without a "Windows port"?

> I don't 
> expect many 
> people to do it. Usually Open Source guys run *NIX

Taken a poll lately?
 
> >Sorry, couldn't help myself...Seriously, it's a cultural thing, I 
> >wouldn't
> >plan on a mighty hoard of windows database developers who 
> are put off by 
> >loading cygwin.  I do wonder what the requirements are for building 
> >commercial db's that run on unix and windows.  I imagine they are 
> >similarly off-putting if it were an option.
> >  
> >
> 
> In case of SAP DB they use a tool kit for building
> 
> http://www.sapdb.org/develop/sap_db_development.htm

> It is truly painful to build it - even on UNIX (I haven't tried on 
> Windows and I won't try in the future).
> As far as I have seen it throughs millions of compiler warnings.

It was simple to build.  And if you don't want to build it, they have binary distributions.  I have SAP/DB running on this machine (along with SQL*Server, PostgreSQL, DB/2, Oracle, Firebird and a few others)  SAP DB is or can be used for SAP (basically, it's a port of Adabas).  That makes it kind of important, for obvious reasons.

Tue, 21 Jan 2003 23:01:57 -0800
"Dann Corbit" <DCorbit@connx.com>
Re: [mail] Re: Win32 port patches submitted
On Wednesday 22 January 2003 02:01, Dann Corbit wrote:
> Maybe because most of the machines in the world (by a titanic landslide)
> are Windoze boxes.

On the desktop, yes.  On the server, no.  PostgreSQL is nore intended for a 
server, no?  I can see the utility in having a development installation on a 
Win32 box, though.

> > people to do it. Usually Open Source guys run *NIX

> Taken a poll lately?

If Microsoft has its way there won't be any Open Source on Windows.  Well, 
PostgreSQL might squeak by due to the BSD license, but other licenses aren't 
so fortunate, and GPL is anathema to Microsoft.
-- 
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11


Wed, 22 Jan 2003 11:43:44 -0500
Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org>
Re: [mail] Re: Win32 port patches submitted