| From: | The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Warnock <david(at)sundayta(dot)co(dot)uk> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, David Heinecke <dheinecke(at)axent(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] Anyone doing a native NT port? |
| Date: | 1999-09-29 03:15:57 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.BSF.4.10.9909290015230.33998-100000@thelab.hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, 27 Sep 1999, David Warnock wrote:
> Bruce,
>
> As I am not going to be able to help on the coding I won't try to
> comment on it's dificulty.
>
> But I will ask what realistic expectations are for the current NT port
> using cgywin. My current concern is that the installation is very
> complex and the useability is poor due to the need to enter a cgywin
> shell to access any of the postgresql features.
>
> So
>
> a) Is it going to be possible using cgywin to build binaries
> (postmaster, createdb, psql etc) that can be run from a standard windows
> NT command prompt? Or will a cgywin shell always be needed? If this can
> be done then so that we can provide an installation of binaries with no
> unix shell visible then we can probably get this accepted by our users.
pgAdmin should provide you with this, no?
Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org secondary: scrappy(at){freebsd|postgresql}.org
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Clayton Cottingham | 1999-09-29 03:37:35 | new irc channel |
| Previous Message | The Hermit Hacker | 1999-09-29 03:14:23 | RE: [GENERAL] Anyone doing a native NT port? |