postgres initdb on ALPHA/Digital Unix - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Stockwell
Subject postgres initdb on ALPHA/Digital Unix
Date
Msg-id 199802130403.RAA24964@sanger.otago.ac.nz
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: [HACKERS] postgres initdb on ALPHA/Digital Unix  (The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 11 Feb 1998, Kenji T. Hollis wrote:

>> Brian:
>>
>> > > I wrote a message about 4 months ago asking about an Alpha Linux version
>> > > of PostGreSQL.  Last I heard, they were working on it and it would be
>> > > released in early January with a 64-bit clean version of the server.
>> > >
>> > > This is my third request.
>> >
>> > So, fix it your own self and stop whining.  Can't fix it?  Too bad, I
>> > guess you'll just have to wait until they get around to it.
>>
>> Is this how you guys normally handle inquiries?  Idiot replies like this?
>> Oh by the way, I tried fixing it.  Next question?
>
>    No, this isn't...generally we tend to try and point you in the
>right direction towards determining the problem...
>
>    ...first question is, how many ppl out there are running under a
>Linux/Alpha platform, or at least are trying?  I don't have one myself, so
>can only be of limited help...
>

I have been trying to build Postgres 6.3 on an Alpha, running Digital
Standard Unix, and have been finding a similar problem to Ken Hollis,
once I succeeded in getting the thing to compile cleanly
[...]
>
>ERROR:  BuildFuncTupleDesc: function mkoidname(opaque, opaque) does not exist
>ERROR:  BuildFuncTupleDesc: function mkoidname(opaque, opaque) does not exist
>

Get a similar problem to the above

This problem has also occurred
  1. using native cc instead of gcc
  2. encouraging native cc to restrict image to 32 bits (-taso flag) at
      ld time.

Forcing pointers to 32 bits with native cc by use of the -xtaso_short
CC and LD flags dies with errors related to varargs datatypes, so I
haven't managed to investigate this further.

I originally also encountered these errors with postgres 6.2.1, but
given the iminent release of 6.3 and significant other distractions, I
decided to wait for this before revisiting the issue.

I have already posted this problem to the pgsql-ports mailing list,
but it is less that totally evident from our remote location what is
the best strategy, so I await developments here on 64 bit issues with
interest.

regards

Peter A. Stockwell

peter@sanger.otago.ac.nz

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Shared memory corruption?
Next
From: The Hermit Hacker
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] postgres initdb on ALPHA/Digital Unix