From: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Neil Conway <nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org> |
Cc: | tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: How much work is a native Windows application? |
Date: | 2002-05-08 12:28:38 |
Message-ID: | 20020508092800.U32524-100000@mail1.hub.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 8 May 2002, Neil Conway wrote:
> On Wed, 8 May 2002 01:03:37 -0300 (ADT)
> "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> wrote:
> > On Tue, 7 May 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > > It'd be worth trying to understand cygwin issues in detail before we
> > > sign up to do and support a native Windows port. I understand the
> > > user-friendliness objection to cygwin (though one would think proper
> > > packaging might largely hide cygwin from naive Windows users). What I
> > > don't understand is whether there are any serious performance lossages
> > > from it, and if so whether we could work around them.
> >
> > Actually, there are licensing issues involved ... we could never put a
> > 'windows binary' up for anon-ftp, since to distribute it would require the
> > cygwin.dll to be distributed, and to do that, there is a licensing cost
>
> Why? Isn't Cyygwin GPL'd? From http://cygwin.com/licensing.html I don't
> see anything that would require licensing fees for OSD-compliant software.
I may be wrong about this ... this was prior to Redhat buying it out,
which I totally forgot about ...
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2002-05-08 12:30:01 | Re: Bug #659: lower()/upper() bug on ->multibyte<- DB |
Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2002-05-08 12:15:09 | Re: How much work is a native Windows application? |