Обсуждение: Re: [HACKERS] Request for supported platforms

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason Tishler [mailto:jason@tishler.net]
> Sent: 29 October 2002 14:48
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: Bruce Momjian; PostgreSQL-development; Thomas Lockhart;
> Tom Lane; Pgsql-Cygwin
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Request for supported platforms
>
>
> I found a solution to the above which will hopefully find its way
> into the next Cygwin release:
>
>     http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-patches/2002-q4/msg00042.html
>
> > Yes, I'm seeing errors with this on my updated Cygwin very early in
> > the build. I did think it was my hacked about installation, but I
> > guess not!
>
> A quick and *dirty* fix for this problem is to temporarily delete the
> above two entries from your stdio.h file.

Hi Jason,

All regression tests pass with the above hack on:

CYGWIN_NT-5.1 PC9 1.3.14(0.62/3/2) 2002-10-24 10:48 i686 unknown

Hackers: As the Cygwin release that is actively supported is the binary
distribution that Jason builds, I would think this is OK to be listed as
supported if no-one disagrees...

Regards, Dave.

Dave,

On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 04:57:58PM -0000, Dave Page wrote:
> All regression tests pass with the above hack on:
>
> CYGWIN_NT-5.1 PC9 1.3.14(0.62/3/2) 2002-10-24 10:48 i686 unknown

Thanks for the above.

> Hackers: As the Cygwin release that is actively supported is the
> binary distribution that Jason builds, I would think this is OK to be
> listed as supported if no-one disagrees...

Umm...  Should I disagree? :,)

Jason

I kept Dave and Jason's name on the report.

Ports list updated:

  http://candle.pha.pa.us/main/writings/pgsql/sgml/supported-platforms.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave Page wrote:
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jason Tishler [mailto:jason@tishler.net]
> > Sent: 29 October 2002 14:48
> > To: Dave Page
> > Cc: Bruce Momjian; PostgreSQL-development; Thomas Lockhart;
> > Tom Lane; Pgsql-Cygwin
> > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Request for supported platforms
> >
> >
> > I found a solution to the above which will hopefully find its way
> > into the next Cygwin release:
> >
> >     http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-patches/2002-q4/msg00042.html
> >
> > > Yes, I'm seeing errors with this on my updated Cygwin very early in
> > > the build. I did think it was my hacked about installation, but I
> > > guess not!
> >
> > A quick and *dirty* fix for this problem is to temporarily delete the
> > above two entries from your stdio.h file.
>
> Hi Jason,
>
> All regression tests pass with the above hack on:
>
> CYGWIN_NT-5.1 PC9 1.3.14(0.62/3/2) 2002-10-24 10:48 i686 unknown
>
> Hackers: As the Cygwin release that is actively supported is the binary
> distribution that Jason builds, I would think this is OK to be listed as
> supported if no-one disagrees...
>
> Regards, Dave.
>

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Dave Page writes:

> Hackers: As the Cygwin release that is actively supported is the binary
> distribution that Jason builds, I would think this is OK to be listed as
> supported if no-one disagrees...

I disagree.  We document as supported those platforms that build out of
the box, not those that build somehow, somewhere, by someone.

Rather than advocating methods to manually edit your system headers we
should try to find out what the problem really is, such as by analyzing
config.log.

--
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net

Peter,

On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 07:36:40PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Dave Page writes:
> > Hackers: As the Cygwin release that is actively supported is the
> > binary distribution that Jason builds, I would think this is OK to
> > be listed as supported if no-one disagrees...
>
> I disagree.  We document as supported those platforms that build out
> of the box, not those that build somehow, somewhere, by someone.
>
> Rather than advocating methods to manually edit your system headers we
> should try to find out what the problem really is, such as by
> analyzing config.log.

Did you miss the following?

    http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2002-10/msg01303.php

As you can see, I have already performed root cause analysis of theses
problems *and* have taken the proper steps to ensure that PostgreSQL
builds OOTB under Cygwin (after the next Cygwin release).

Jason