On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> wrote: > On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 11:36, Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> wrote: >> On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 5:42 AM, Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> wrote: >>> >>> Yes. I spent a few cents and a few hours wrestling with it. AFAICT your are >>> hosed on 64bit Windows. I can't get flex built and Cygwin is behaving very >>> oddly. There are indications that the problem could be fairly deep - see >>> <http://www.mail-archive.com/cyg...@cygwin.com/msg102463.html> >> >> What Linda describes there is all normal behaviour for a 32 bit app on >> 64 bit Windows. Windows is providing a virtual 32 bit environment, >> where for the most part the 32 bit app doesn't realise it's running on >> 64 bit. Unfortunately there are always things that look a bit odd due >> to this, but normally I've found that the 32bit code runs fine, it >> just looks odd from Explorer or 64 bit apps because of the >> folder/registry redirection that happens behind the scenes. > > Yeah, none of that should have an effect on a tool like "flex", though...
Thats my point. >> The other possible option that I hesitate to suggest is Windows >> Services for Unix or SUA as I think it's now called. > > You mean we should post flex to that? Or have you found someone who has > already? No idea if someone has done it already. I'm just throwing it out there as an idea possibly worthy of further investigation. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
