| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
| Subject: | Re: Compiling libpq with VC6 |
| Date: | 2004-08-18 19:38:42 |
| Message-ID: | 3314.1092857922@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> writes:
>> One thing that hasn't been real clear to me is why this only affects
>> fe-lobj.c, when we have many other files that include <io.h> after
>> including postgres.h.
> Quite simple: mingw includes do *not* conflict.
> Only a minority of tools is object to VC6 compilation, ultimately only
> libpq is needed.
Hm. Given that we now support a native Windows port, do we care about
building libpq with VC6 anymore? Why wouldn't you just use the library
as built with mingw?
If we were moving in the direction of making the whole project buildable
with VC6, that would be one thing; but as far as I know that is
explicitly not part of the plan. So why should we continue to support a
partially-baked port when we have a full port?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andreas Pflug | 2004-08-18 19:58:18 | Re: Compiling libpq with VC6 |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-08-18 19:35:30 | Re: Compiling libpq with VC6 |