Re: Windows + IP6 progress

Tom Lane wrote:

>Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>
>
>>Chuck McDevitt wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I think it's because it's __stdcall, and the name gets mangled to
>>>include the number of parameters.
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>>Aha! now it makes sense. How do we get around that in the configure tests?
>>
>>
>
>I thought it might be something like that ... but the question remains:
>how/why is getaddrinfo different from all the other library routines we
>probe for?
>
>
>
>

I think many if not all of those that succeed come from the mingw
libraries. For example, the Windows libraries don't have getopt at all,
I believe.

But I confess I don't understand enough about how it works to give a
definitive answer.

Meanwhile, Petr Jelinek reports that the binaries I made fail on Windows
versions as modern as Windows 2000 (missing freeaddrinfo). Darn.

So the choices appear to be:
a) check for all the required functions at runtime, and otherwise use
our homegrown getaddrinfo and friends (and don't support ipv6)
b) teach our getaddrinfo and friends about ipv6
c) have a configure flag (--enable-win-ipv6 ? ) for those Windows
platforms that do/don't support ipv6. That would mean 2 sets of binaries ;-(
d) don't support ipv6 in windows.
e) something else I haven't thought of

Looks to me like a) is the best bet, but it's beyond my Windows
programming capacity and experience. We do something of the sort with
src/interfaces/libpq/win32.c. Maybe Chuck or Petr could come up with a
patch?

cheers

andrew