Re: [GENERAL] Anyone doing a native NT port?

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.

b) Is it possible to add support for Windows 9x? If so it anyone working
on this? (NB I am not considering this as a server platform but for a
single user system to avoid us supporting multiple dbms) [anyway I don't
know of an alternative to Postgresql that has the same feature set - I
need most postgresql features {license and technical}].

> Let me just through up a red flag on this.  PostgreSQL uses more Unix
> services that most software, and is almost the size/complexity of many
> Unix kernels.
>
> This is not going to be easy to do.  CygWin works because it is
> emulating the Unix things we need on NT.  To do a native port, you would
> have to translate all our unix service calls to NT-style library calls.

Dave

--
David Warnock
Sundayta Ltd