Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: win2k, service, pg_ctl, popen, etc

From: "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>
To: "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>,<pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: win2k, service, pg_ctl, popen, etc
Date: 2004-07-21 14:06:37
Message-ID: 6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCE34BED7@algol.sollentuna.se (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers-win32
> >Does there continue to be any resistance to this approach? 
> If not, I'll 
> >gladly provide a patch.
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> As I understand it, Windows has a standard set of DLL/EXE 
> metadata (build number, copyright, product name yadda yadda 
> yadda) stored in some well-known segment of the file. Is 
> there any reason we can't put the version number somewhere in 
> there and use some standard API to extract it, rather than 
> running the .exe to make it tell us? (Not that I have any 
> idea how to do such a thing.)

We could, see VerQueryValue() and friends on MSDN.
It *requires* that the version number *always* follows the pattern
a.b.c.d, where each of a-d is a 32 bit unsigned int. Meaning there is no
way to determine RCs etc, unless we start tracking build numbers in some
way.

While I think the whole checking of the version there is somewhat of an
overkill (again, if you mix binary versions, you are probably going to
mess up a whole lot of other things too), it is probably not a bad idea
to add version numbering to the binaries *anyway*...

//Magnus


pgsql-hackers-win32 by date

Next:From: Andreas PflugDate: 2004-07-21 14:10:58
Subject: Re: win2k, service, pg_ctl, popen, etc
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2004-07-21 14:05:37
Subject: Re: Borland c++ compile problems...

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group