On 01/21/2013 02:17 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Jan 21, 2013 3:06 AM, "Craig Ringer" <cr...@2ndquadrant.com
<mailto:cr...@2ndquadrant.com>> wrote:
>
> On 01/21/2013 10:03 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> > On 01/19/2013 04:08 AM, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
> >> However, I am not sure whether Cygwin provides the mkstemp() call
or not.
> >> Searching... Found bugzilla reports against mkstemp on Cygwin.
> > Is Cygwin a platform that should be targeted for the server backend
> > these days?
> >
> > I can understand making sure that libpq works on Cygwin, but is there
> > any reason at all to run a Pg server backend on Cygwin rather than as
> > native Windows binaries?
>
> I'm not suggesting immediately dropping working support, since this is
> so trivially worked around. I'm just wondering why anybody cares about
> the platform.
I have suggested similar before, and been voted down :) iirc Andrew
uses it, no? Either way, the consensus earlier had been that as long
as it doesn't require major surgery or blocks something else, we
should try to keep it working. And as you say this sounds like
something that can be handled trivially, I think now is not the time.
No, I only use the client. But then I support plenty of things I don't use.
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
