I agree with all of you that it is strange behavior, more then that :
On two win 2003 machines with the same SP and last hot fixes, on one the nul device is accessible by non admin user and on other it is not.
I also agree that the source of the problem might be something that effect the OS configuration (as a virus scanner for example).
The source of the problem and the right diagnostic is important, but right now we have problem (unknown) with the nul device on some of the system.
I don't see any risk with canceling the redirection nor with open a log file (with permission to the postgres user), if a commercial DB, as EnterpriseDB, choose this solution (Log file) I don't see any reason why not to do the same.
Does anyone know why EnterpriseDB changed the nul redirection?
> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 11:37:30 +0200
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> CC: firstname.lastname@example.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; email@example.com
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] [Patch] - Fix for bug #2558, InitDB failed to run
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> I am more than somewhat perplexed as to why the NUL device should be a
> >> security risk ... what are they thinking??
> > Frankly, I don't believe it; even Microsoft can't be that stupid.
> > And I can't find any suggestion that they've done this in a google
> > search. I think the OP is misdiagnosing his problem.
> An older message suggests that a service pack induced this problem, per
> MS. I just tried it as non-admin on a W2K3 machine with recent hotfixes,
> and the command "dir >nul" _did_ work for me.
> Though neglected, it still sounds like a virus scanner issue to me.
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
Be one of the first to try Windows Live Mail. Windows Live Mail.
- Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] [Patch] - Fix for bug #2558, InitDB failed dror