Jan Wieck wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > [...]
> > months ago, and they're not done. That gives me no confidence that
> > they'll meet the next deadline we set. If September comes and we still
> > have no working Win32 port, will you vote to delay again?
>
> I have to agree on this. Things like the Win32 port tend to take longer
> and longer. With a release schedule every 3-6 months they'll just get
> released whenever they're done. To hold back other improvements because
> of them is not right.
I have been with Jan for two days now and I can report the Win32 status.
Jan is working on getting fork/exec to work in our code. He should be
done next week. He is trying to do it as cleanly as possible.
Here is my Win32 TODO list:*file path separators*root directory*cp, rm*handle \r in COPY*rename and unlink
atomicityfork/execcompatibilitydefinesspinlock changesDWORD in help.cinitdbsignalsmakefiles and build
environmentruntimeenvironmentcancel key handlingUNKNOWN -handle config file changes that happen before backend starts
signalsxcopyvs cpsync vs commit() SRA
Jan feels that the next step is to decide on a build environment. I
think we had discussed _not_ using the MS project files, but instead
using gmake and perhaps the MingW or Visual C command line compiler.
As far as timeframe, Jan thinks July 1 is going to be a difficult
deadline. However, if most of the code changes are done by then, we can
play with making the Win32 environment and binaries during beta. Of
course, we can probably get the massive changes done by June 1 too.
So, when do we want beta? Seems most want July 1 because Win32 will be
farther along and PITR has a chance of making it. However, none of
those are certain.
-- 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,
Pennsylvania19073