Sure. I'll make the changes so that the next available Windows installers include lbintl.h in $Installdir/include. How about the changes with respect to NLS?
On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 2:44 PM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 3:32 AM, Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Hi all > > Out of personal interest (in pain and suffering) I was recently looking > into how to compile extensions out-of-tree on Windows using Visual > Studio (i.e. no PGXS). > > It looks like the conventional answer to this is "Do a source build of > PG, compile your ext in-tree in contrib/, and hope the result is binary > compatible with release PostgreSQL builds for Windows". Certainly that's > how I've been doing it to date. > > How about everyone else here? Does anyone actually build and distribute > extensions out of tree at all? > > I'm interested in making the Windows installer distributions a bit more > extension dev friendly. In particular, I'd really like to see EDB's > Windows installers include the libintl.h for the included libintl, since > its omission, combined with Pg being built with ENABLE_NLS, tends to > break things horribly. Users can always undefine ENABLE_NLS, but it's an > unnecessary roadblock.
Sandeep, can you work on fixing this please?
Thanks.
> Are there any objections from -hackers to including 3rd party headers > for libs we expose in our public headers in the binary distribution? > > Other than bundling 3rd party headers, any ideas/suggestions for how we > might make ext building saner on Windows? > > -- > Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ > PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services > >