2010/1/15 Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net>: > > > Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> >> Do people still use MinGW for any real work? Could we just drop >> walreceiver support from MinGW builds? >> >> Or maybe we should consider splitting walreceiver into two parts after >> all. Only the bare minimum that needs to access libpq would go into the >> shared object, and the rest would be linked with the backend as usual. >> >> > > I use MinGW when doing Windows work (e.g. the threading piece in parallel > pg_restore). And I think it is generally desirable to be able to build on > Windows using an open source tool chain. I'd want a damn good reason to > abandon its use. And I don't like the idea of not supporting walreceiver on > it either. Please find another solution if possible. >
Yeah. FWIW, I don't use mingw do do any windows development, but definitely +1 on working hard to keep support for it if at all possible. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
