Well, for one.... I have no idea what cygwin is, or what it does to
your system, or what security vulnerabilities it might add to your
system. It comes with alot of stuff that I may or may not need, but
what components I need to run Postgres is not clear.
Two.... could Postgres be made more efficient on Windows if it ran
Three.... can you start cygwin programs on startup of the system?
>Dwayne Miller wrote:
>>I understand that the current port of Postgres for Windows requires the
>>cygwin package. I'd like to understand the requirement for cygwin,and
>>possibly try to port Postgres to run natively on Windows as a NT/2K
>>service. Anyone like to identify the challenges in such a port? Is it
>>at all possible? Anyone else trying to do this?
>I'm not trying to do so, but I'm not sure I would say it is possible without
>the the type of technology in cygwin.
>I have spent a lot of years writing NT drivers and programs. Unless you have a
>real reason why cygwin is not practical, why bother?
>The OS differences between NT and UNIX are huge. The main difference are
>processes. There is no "fork" in NT, and that is a huge gulf to cross. Is there
>a reason why you would not want to use cygwin?
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Ian Lance Taylor||Date: 2001-09-02 05:08:02|
|Subject: Re: Porting to Native WindowsNT/2000|
|Previous:||From: John Summerfield||Date: 2001-09-02 02:27:52|
|Subject: Build problem with CVS version |