Re: 8.0: Absolute path required for INITDB?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 8.0: Absolute path required for INITDB?
Date: 2004-08-16 02:03:14
Message-ID: 2774.1092621794@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs pgsql-patches

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> What was the resolution of this? Can we make relative -L work or do we
> add error checks for relative -L paths?

We fixed the problem that was requiring Josh to use -L. I think -L is a
wizard's switch and need not be user-friendly, so I feel no need to do
either of the above.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2004-08-16 03:42:38 Re: 8.0: Absolute path required for INITDB?
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2004-08-16 01:28:37 Re: 8.0: Absolute path required for INITDB?

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-08-16 02:13:36 Re: Add GUC_REPORT to server_encoding, integer_datetimes
Previous Message Tom Lane 2004-08-16 02:01:42 Re: Win32 fix for pg_dumpall