Re: rename() vs. link(); building from source
От | Jason Tishler |
---|---|
Тема | Re: rename() vs. link(); building from source |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20020512141752.GB3144@tishler.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: rename() vs. link(); building from source (Barry Pederson <bp@barryp.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: rename() vs. link(); building from source
|
Список | pgsql-cygwin |
Barry, On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 11:24:42PM -0500, Barry Pederson wrote: > IIRC, all you have to do to build (assuming you have all other necessary > cygwin packages installed - gcc, etc) is cd to the above mentioned > directory and run: CYGWIN-PATCHES/build.sh 7.2.1 1 > > (those last 2 params are the version and port number, which the build.sh > expects as arguments, I don't recall offhand exactly why, but things seemed > to go smoother later on if I kept the same port number as what the -real- > cygwin postgresql package was) The port (i.e. package) number is free to change. It only affects the "-x" (e.g., "-1") in the tarball names -- that's it. > When I tried it (to do the unlink/rename change), I tweaked the build.sh > line 27 to remove --with-perl and --with-python from the configure args. > Other than that, it built out-of-the-box pretty much as advertised (and the > recycling transaction logs problem went away in my case). Did you use the (exact) patch at the end of: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-cygwin/2002-04/msg00057.php If so, then please confirm this fact and I will submit this patch to pgsql-patches for consideration. If not, then please try again with this (exact) patch. If you are still successful, then I will submit it. I need this assistance, because I cannot (easily) reproduce this problem myself. Thanks, Jason
В списке pgsql-cygwin по дате отправления: