Bruce Momjian wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Tom Lane wrote: > > >> I thought the consensus of the discussion was that this was not > > >> necessary. It sure doesn't strike me as a good idea. > > > > > This is only in the WIN32_DEV, where installing bison/flex is a pain. I > > > copy the needed files over manually when I update that CVS from HEAD. > > > > That's not a pain? You don't expect that WIN32_DEV will be broken on a > > regular basis because its derived files are out of date? > > > > Mind you, I do not actually give a darn whether WIN32_DEV is broken. > > What bothers me about this is that if it's considered a good idea for > > WIN32_DEV (whose only users, presumably, are developers clueful enough > > to obtain the needed tools for themselves) then whenever Windows support > > gets merged back to HEAD, we will be feeling pressure to do the same in > > the HEAD branch. And that is something up with which I will not put. > > It is just easier for them to get start. Yea, they will need it when it > is merged.
Also, keep in mind that in the end most folks will be building under MinGW using a release tarball, that has those output files. We haven't gotten a MinGW release yet, so they have to build all the stuff. I use my unix bison/flex to build, but other's don't have that capability. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
