X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <460B4F62.9D09523C@dessent.net> Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 22:32:18 -0700 From: Brian Dessent X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Using mysql 5.1.16 beta client libraries on cygwin References: <460AD8D2 DOT 8030909 AT sapo DOT pt> <460ADC85 DOT 2BFCA7F1 AT dessent DOT net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Brian Dessent wrote: > though. The build infrastructure for PHP doesn't support Cygwin and > it's a real nightmare to try to work with. I just want to add a couple of clarifications to that statement, as I'm sure somebody will dig this up in the archives in 5 years and somehow try to use it to mean something I didn't intend. A. I was working with php 4.x and apache 1.x at the time. Things might have improved in 5.x and I'm sure things have improved in 2.x, build-system wise. B. I was explicitly working with the requirement that all PHP modules be shared and not static, since this allows for much greater user flexibility, e.g. "I don't want to also have to download and install Postgres libraries and have the Postgres PHP modules resident in memory even though I use MySQL and don't use Postgres at all." If you can settle for a static PHP binary then things become a lot simpler and it's not too hard to get a Cygwin PHP running. But then you're forced to live with the module choices of the person that built the package. C. The motivation to do this is somewhat sapped by the fact that native Win32 binaries (and even fancy automated GUI one-click installers) have existed for the Apache/PHP/MySQL stack for quite a while, so the Windows user can simply use these if they really need to work with PHP. And I'm positive that these native versions are much faster than their Cygwin counterparts. So the only remaining reason for wanting a Cygwin port of the stack is for people that need to replicate a unix environment as closely as possibe. But even then, the win32 native ones can come pretty close in most respects. Brian -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/