Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I have never heard back on this, AFAIK. If anyone has instructions on
how to manage this please let me know. My current status with MSVC/vista
is still that I can build but not run as an admin user, and run but not
build as a non-admin user. Bleah.
I remember
Dave Page wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On a somewhat related note, I have had spectacular lack of success in
getting either MSVC or MinGW builds to work on Vista - so much so
that I have currently abandoned my attempts on that platform and I
resorted to resuscitating an old XP box for
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Dave Page wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On a somewhat related note, I have had spectacular lack of success
in getting either MSVC or MinGW builds to work on Vista - so much so
that I have currently abandoned my attempts on that platform and I
resorted to resuscitating an
Andrei Kovalevski wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Dave Page wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On a somewhat related note, I have had spectacular lack of success
in getting either MSVC or MinGW builds to work on Vista - so much
so that I have currently abandoned my attempts on that platform and
I
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Relevant perl code executed by buildfarm:
chdir $pgsql/src/tools/msvc;
@makeout = `build 21`;
chdir $branch_root;
my $status = $? 8;
I know the docs say otherwise, but would it be possible that chdir
somehow resets $? on windows, sometimes,
Dave Page wrote:
If I then
switch to the non-admin user, it can run initdb just fine. However,
that user can't build, because it gets a mysterious failure from
mt.exe. MinGW is even worse - it says it can't run gcc because it
can't run cc1.exe (IIRC), so it fails at the configure stage! All
user) . I can build as the admin user but when I come to run
initdb it fails, complaining that it can't find the postgres
executable.
FYI, this happens on my Win 2000 also.
Maybe a problem with mixed / \ path separators after RestrictExec.
Andreas
---(end of
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Dave Page wrote:
Perhaps someone would like to tell me how I can remedy these
problems. More importantly, this should be in an FAQ or some such.
Also, I would like to know if we have really tested out on Vista the
privilege surrendering code that is is supposed to
Magnus Hagander wrote:
Running the same test from the buildfarm script on the same machine, and it
picks up the error and reports it just fine.
(http://pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=skylarkdt=2007-06-25%2008:28:31)
I ran on Baiji (renaming the zlib directory, instead of the .lib as
On Sun, Jun 24, 2007 at 08:24:43PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I am still very unhappy about the way the MSVC builds work. Although we
have managed to make it sort of work with the buildfarm script, it is
distinctly fragile. Last night,
Dave Page wrote:
I'm going to run on my Win2K3
animal in a minute - that one runs VC++ Express, unlike Baiji and
Skylark which I believe are both 'proper' Visual Studio. Will report
back when it's done.
Yep, it failed at make as well, and reported it appropriately to the BF.
Regards, Dave
Dave Page wrote:
Dave Page wrote:
I'm going to run on my Win2K3 animal in a minute - that one runs VC++
Express, unlike Baiji and Skylark which I believe are both 'proper'
Visual Studio. Will report back when it's done.
Yep, it failed at make as well, and reported it appropriately to the
Magnus Hagander wrote:
Can you run the build in broken mode but *without* using the buildfarm
scripts, and see what errorlevel you get? Meaning:
build.bat
... wait ...
echo %errorlevel%
It should output 1 if that part works, 0 if it fails. That'll tell us if
the problem is in the bf or if
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 10:06:57AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
Can you run the build in broken mode but *without* using the buildfarm
scripts, and see what errorlevel you get? Meaning:
build.bat
... wait ...
echo %errorlevel%
It should output 1 if that part
Magnus Hagander wrote:
As for perl, I'm probably not on the very latest, but it's not so old. I'm
on:
This is perl, v5.8.8 built for MSWin32-x64-multi-thread
(with 33 registered patches, see perl -V for more detail)
Dave - what version are you on?
This is perl, v5.8.8 built for
Magnus Hagander wrote:
cmd.exe from Windows - I assume you haven't installed some funky addon
special command interpreter? In that case, it should be the same. So I
have:
Microsoft Windows [Version 5.2.3790]
(C) Copyright 1985-2003 Microsoft Corp.
Hmm. Mine says 5.1.2600, which seems
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 10:45:00AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
cmd.exe from Windows - I assume you haven't installed some funky addon
special command interpreter? In that case, it should be the same. So I
have:
Microsoft Windows [Version 5.2.3790]
(C) Copyright
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Hmm. Mine says 5.1.2600, which seems to be quite old. I'll see about
updating ... the strange thing is I'm pretty sure I've seen this on
other more up to date machines.
You can't update that unless you upgrade to Windows 2003 or Vista.
That's the XP command shell.
Dave Page wrote:
Dave Page wrote:
If I then
switch to the non-admin user, it can run initdb just fine. However,
that user can't build, because it gets a mysterious failure from
mt.exe. MinGW is even worse - it says it can't run gcc because it
can't run cc1.exe (IIRC), so it fails at the
Magnus Hagander wrote:
Can we change that or make it switchable? I'd be happy to provide an
environment variable like RUNNING_BUILDFARM if that would help.
We could, but it seems very ugly. And again, it's *not* required for
buildfarm on my or Daves machines. So I'd rather like to know
Magnus Hagander wrote:
So it might be worthwhile to see if this is something that happens on =
XP, and works on = 2003. Dave, did you test on any server OS other than
2003, or any client that's XP or earlier?
No, my testing was only on 2k3 and vista.
/D
---(end of
On Sun, 2007-06-24 at 13:23 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
(cut)
On a somewhat related note, I have had spectacular lack of success in
getting either MSVC or MinGW builds to work on Vista - so much so that I
have currently abandoned my attempts on that platform and I resorted to
Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
This has come up quite recently on the MingW lists - see
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=00fc01c7a0af%
240a037c30%240200a8c0%40AMD2500forum_name=mingw-users for a discussion
of the problem and solution.
Thanks. I've actually got past
I am still very unhappy about the way the MSVC builds work. Although we
have managed to make it sort of work with the buildfarm script, it is
distinctly fragile. Last night, for example, I had a build failure due
to a badly installed zlib. The error state didn't come back to the
buildfarm
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On a somewhat related note, I have had spectacular lack of success in
getting either MSVC or MinGW builds to work on Vista - so much so that I
have currently abandoned my attempts on that platform and I resorted to
resuscitating an old XP box for testing. Following some
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I am still very unhappy about the way the MSVC builds work. Although we
have managed to make it sort of work with the buildfarm script, it is
distinctly fragile. Last night, for example, I had a build failure due
to a badly installed zlib. The error state didn't come
Magnus Hagander wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I am still very unhappy about the way the MSVC builds work. Although we
have managed to make it sort of work with the buildfarm script, it is
distinctly fragile. Last night, for example, I had a build failure due
to a badly installed zlib. The
Dave Page wrote:
Perhaps someone would like to tell me how I can remedy these
problems. More importantly, this should be in an FAQ or some such.
Also, I would like to know if we have really tested out on Vista the
privilege surrendering code that is is supposed to work in Windows.
It
28 matches
Mail list logo
