Return-Path: pg_adm@postgres.berkeley.edu Received: by postgres.Berkeley.EDU (5.61/1.29) id AA11607; Mon, 7 Dec 92 04:13:57 -0800 Date: Mon, 7 Dec 92 04:13:57 -0800 Message-Id: <9212071213.AA11607@postgres.Berkeley.EDU> From: Leonard Norrgard Subject: initdb problems To: postgres@postgres.berkeley.edu Sender: pg_adm@postgres.berkeley.edu I'm building Postgres 4.0.1 on a sparc with OS/MP 4.1A.3 Export from Solbourne (functionally equivalent to Sun's, except perhaps less bugs, I'm told). Everything goes well until initdb time. Initdb dies as follows: > initdb: verbose mode on > initdb: looking for postgres... > initdb: found /usr/postgres/bin/postgres > initdb: looking for template files... > initdb: using /usr/postgres/files/local1_template1.bki > initdb: using /usr/postgres/files/global1.bki > initdb: creating SHARED relations in /usr/postgres/data > initdb: creating template database in /usr/postgres/data/base/template1 > WARN:Dec 7 13:41:19:cannot open pg_proc > WARN:Dec 7 13:41:19:must OPEN RELATION before INSERT > > WARN:Dec 7 13:41:19:must OPEN RELATION before INSERT Lots of errors follow, but the key seems to be in "cannot open pg_proc". What might be the cause of this? I've tried doing initdb both as user postgres and root, but the result is the same. Postgres runs with uid 7 on this machine. The "postgres installation instructions" document says that the "relase notes" document has info on how to get around this, but it has not. The older versions of the release notes mention ways to do this, but no longer correspond to the actual source code involved. Besides, looking at the current source code, it seems that it handles uid:s other than 6 automatically these days. Time to update the installation instructions? I tried reporting this to bug-postgres@postgres.berkeley.edu a couple of weeks ago and have so far heard nothing (except for the automated reply). What is the intended use for bug-postgres, really? Shouldn't reports to that address _at_least_ end up in pub/postgres-v4r0r1.bugs on postgres.berkeley.edu? That file still has an August datestamp. -- Leonard