From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
Cc: | "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, greg(dot)landrum(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: writing backend extensions using Visual Studio |
Date: | 2005-03-29 15:22:27 |
Message-ID: | 21848.1112109747@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers-win32 |
"Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> Yeah - these used to be installed by 'make install-all-headers' iirc,
> however that has gone now. I can't see anything in /INSTALL or the docs
> on what to use instead other than the source tree (which doesn't ship
> with pgInstaller of course).
> So, a question to anyone who knows, do we really need to ship *all*
> headers with the installer, or is there a useful subset?
The reason 'make install-all-headers' went away is that we made a policy
decision to install *all* the headers. I don't think the Windows
packaging should be second-guessing that. It would be reasonable to
have an option to install *none* of the headers, for people who aren't
going to be doing any software development, but if you do install them
please don't be selective about it.
(FWIW I wasn't personally in favor of that decision, but it's a done
deal now --- having some packagings follow it and some not would be
the worst of all possible worlds.)
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dave Page | 2005-03-29 15:45:29 | Re: writing backend extensions using Visual Studio |
Previous Message | Dave Page | 2005-03-29 15:07:43 | Re: writing backend extensions using Visual Studio |