Re: ipc-daemon2 failure - Mailing list pgsql-cygwin
From | Jason Tishler |
---|---|
Subject | Re: ipc-daemon2 failure |
Date | |
Msg-id | 20030725130507.GA1764@tishler.net Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: ipc-daemon2 failure ("Roger Ackroyd" <postgresql@ackroyd.freeserve.co.uk>) |
List | pgsql-cygwin |
Roger, On Thu, Jul 24, 2003 at 05:38:11PM +0100, Roger Ackroyd wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jason Tishler" <jason@tishler.net> > To: "Roger Ackroyd" <postgresql@ackroyd.freeserve.co.uk> > Cc: <pgsql-cygwin@postgresql.org> > Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 3:19 PM > Subject: Re: [CYGWIN] ipc-daemon2 failure > > > IIRC, you had other problems besides the AF_UNIX socket problem. I > > was hoping that you could clearly articulate them so I can *easily* > > update the README as necessary. I will go with Seth changes unless > > I hear otherwise. > > > It was only when I upgraded cygwin1.dll that everything finally worked. Yes. > I may have been dealing with more than one problem. It appears so. > [snip] > > > > On the readme, under requirements, it recommends cygwin 1.3.16-1. > > > At footnote [16] ref step 10, it states 'For cygwin 1.3.22-1 and > > > below, a bug prevents this from working...'. Is this problem > > > something related to this without perhaps being the direct cause?) > > > > Huh? The above is very hard to understand. > > I was referring to Seths amendments to the original readme, that might > have confued it. To try and clarify it states:- > In requirements > The following packages or later are required ... ^^^^^^^^ > ... > cygwin 1.3.16-1 > ... > > Then at footnote [16] with reference to Connect to PostgreSQL (psql) > step 10 > > "[16] For cygwin 1.3.22-1 and below a bug prevents this from working > ... ... " > > Which of these is correct? If the second is correct, then surely end > to end readme procedure cannot work. Both are not quite right anymore. I don't know exactly when the AF_UNIX problem was introduced. IIRC, it was 1.3.20, but I don't have the energy to track down this detail. > I know it seems like a minor point but, Yes. It will become even more insignificant when I rebuild PostgreSQL against 1.5.x and update the README accordingly. > Did upgrading to cygwin1.dll 1.5.1 possibly cure [16] and one or more > other problems with cygwin on this machine? That is what I cannot be > sure of. AFAICT, only [16]. > Is there a version later than 1.3.22-1 and equal to or earlier than > 1.5.1, that is known to cure all or any of the observed similar > problems? Yes, 1.5.0, but again it only fixes [16]. > In which case does cygwin version 1.3.16-1 in requirements need to be > changed? See above. > Does footnote [16] then become redundant? See above. > Also, I could have been doing something else wrong (and in parallel) > all along before I (obviously) did it right! IIRC, yes. Jason -- PGP/GPG Key: http://www.tishler.net/jason/pubkey.asc or key servers Fingerprint: 7A73 1405 7F2B E669 C19D 8784 1AFD E4CC ECF4 8EF6
pgsql-cygwin by date: