Re: Initdb on Windows 2003

From: <James_Hughes(at)McAfee(dot)com>
To: <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Initdb on Windows 2003
Date: 2006-03-03 15:54:02
Message-ID: 2E22904642859A40AF5E1CA1597EBB1F02EF424E@devexmb1.corp.nai.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I think we can safely say that it is not :-)

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Dunstan [mailto:andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net]
Sent: 03 March 2006 15:41
To: Magnus Hagander
Cc: Hughes, James; pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Initdb on Windows 2003

Magnus Hagander wrote:

>
>
>
>>Have raised a helpdesk ticket with Microsoft, see if they can shed any

>>light on the problem.
>>
>>
>
>Sounds good - since you can reproduce it with a simple commandline,
>they should at least accept touching the case ;-)
>
>
>

In any case, since dir > nul fails, I think we can probably say it's Not
Our Problem (tm).

We've used nul on Windows ever since initdb was written in C.

cheers

andrew

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2006-03-03 16:02:22 Re: PG Extensions: Must be statically linked?
Previous Message Luke Lonergan 2006-03-03 15:50:51 Re: PostgreSQL Anniversary Summit, Call for