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. > > > 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. > > Well, that's a fair argument, but why don't you get Marc to set up > nightly snapshots for the WIN32_DEV branch? That only costs cycles > in the short term. Polluting CVS with updates to derived files will > cost us CVS storage forever.
Hmm, another problem is that I don't think there is a flex port for MinGW --- at least I remember someone saying they found bison, but not flex, so if they grab the snapshot, they will not be able to use CVS to do development and diffs. -- 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 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
