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

Re: NT FAQ needs updating

From: Pete Forman <gsez020(at)kryten(dot)bedford(dot)waii(dot)com>
To: pgsql-ports(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: NT FAQ needs updating
Date: 2000-09-25 08:27:04
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-ports
Peter Eisentraut writes:
 > Pete Forman writes:
 > >   Cygwin V1.1 has most things needed.  [I've just built under
 > >   B20.]  Specifically, GCC (formerly EGCS) and libcrypt are up to
 > >   date in there.
 > The question is whether we can expect all our users to update their
 > Cygwin kit to version 1.1 or are there still people running 1.0 or
 > other imperfect releases?

Technically 1.1 is still beta, I suppose.  I built using B20, so GCC
in there is recent enough.  I think, though, that libcrypt comes as
standard in 1.1 but was an add-on in B20.  Another thing with B20 is
that I needed to build the /etc/ files myself to install PostgreSQL.
I was about to submit a FAQ entry for that but it does not arise in
1.1.  B20 is nearly two years old now, 1.1.0 was released in Apr this
year.  I think that B21/1.0 was CD only in Oct 1999.  BTW, which
perfect releases have you managed to get of anything?  ;-)

As to your question, if people use 1.1 there are few extra stages
needed.  If they want to stick with B20 or 1.0 then they will need to
do a bit more work but not much.

 > >   I did not identify anything that was required from the Andy
 > >   Piper Tools.
 > From the list I see on his web page, you might need "less" (for psql),
 > termcap and/or curses might be needed by less or readline(?); the rest
 > doesn't look like it would help.  Any idea?

B20 has less, and the libraries for termcap and readline, though not

 > >   The cygipc library is now at version 1.07 and is hosted at
 > >   <>.
 > Good to know, thanks.
 > >   The patch in faq-nt
 > >   has been incorporated, so it can be deleted from the FAQ.
 > Do you know which versions can be expected to work (other than the
 > latest)?

1.04 incorporated that patch.  1.07 included a patch from me that
fixed a contention with the Exceed X Server.

 > Btw., do you know what the -L option for yacc (in the template
 > file) is supposed to do?  The FAQ file talks about it but I can't
 > make sense of it.

No I don't.  I needed to do nothing in that area but there again bison
or yacc were never called after configuration.  Perhaps one of the
optional modules uses it.

Configure seems to have taken care of things.  Cygwin B20 and 1.1 have
bison 1.25 and configure determines that it will be called with -L.
Redhat 6.2 has bison 1.28 which no longer accepts -L but configure
copes with this.  AIX, IRIX and Solaris all just have yacc and this is
correctly detected as not taking -L.
Pete Forman                 -./\.- Disclaimer: This post is originated
Western Geophysical           -./\.-  by myself and does not represent
pete(dot)forman(at)westgeo(dot)com         -./\.-  the opinion of Baker Hughes or  -./\.-  its divisions.

In response to


pgsql-ports by date

Next:From: Pete FormanDate: 2000-09-25 14:23:45
Subject: Re: NT FAQ needs updating
Previous:From: Jason TishlerDate: 2000-09-22 19:50:51
Subject: Re: Problem Building Cygwin PostgreSQL

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group