> > chose no at that point, and it installs, then errors and completely
> > un-installs.
> > leaving a dir struct under program files with a single file:
> > pgperm.log
> > under the directory with the msi files in it there is a
> full install
> > log, which the list has twice refused to accep
> >>Log in the temp install dir:
> >>The Cacls command can be run only on disk drives that use the NTFS
> >>file system
> >>
> >>I'll have to rip half or more of the full log as it seems to be to
> >>large for the list to accept
> >
> >
> > I assume you are talking about the initdb.log file? Th
Magnus Hagander wrote:
rc5-2 msi will not install at all on a fat32 filesystem
even without initialising the database.
Really? The code for checking the filesystem type is only executed if
you chose to initdb, so I really don't see this happening.
Exactly what
message do you get?
Log in the temp
>>>rc5-2 msi will not install at all on a fat32 filesystem
>>>even without initialising the database.
>>
>>
>> Really? The code for checking the filesystem type is only executed if
>> you chose to initdb, so I really don't see this happening.
>Exactly what
>> message do you get?
>>
>Log in the
Magnus Hagander wrote:
rc5-2 msi will not install at all on a fat32 filesystem
even without initialising the database.
Really? The code for checking the filesystem type is only executed if
you chose to initdb, so I really don't see this happening. Exactly what
message do you get?
Log in the temp i
>rc5-2 msi will not install at all on a fat32 filesystem
>even without initialising the database.
Really? The code for checking the filesystem type is only executed if
you chose to initdb, so I really don't see this happening. Exactly what
message do you get?
>sorry but whole purpose of putting i
I don't think that Windows isn't worth using some versions such as XP are quite
stable for most purposes. By no means am I saying go put a production database
server like Postgres or Oracle on it. SMB's (Small - to - Medium Businesses) may
benefit from Windows 2000 if there aren't able to get so
Frank D. Engel, Jr. wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
You may wish to consider a different database for your project. SQLite
may be a better choice, for example, depending on the project's specific
needs (www.sqlite.org).
Win95/98/ME is poor technology, no matter how many user
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
You may wish to consider a different database for your project. SQLite
may be a better choice, for example, depending on the project's
specific needs (www.sqlite.org).
Win95/98/ME is poor technology, no matter how many users it still has.
It's prob
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Fri, Jan 14, 2005 at 08:39:28AM -0800, J. Greenlees wrote:
why?
since an app that I'm working on would be useless for 60% of potential
clients, using posgresql with the requirement for ms' corrupted ntfs
means postgresql isn't going to work for it.
I think what y
On Fri, Jan 14, 2005 at 08:39:28AM -0800, J. Greenlees wrote:
> why?
> since an app that I'm working on would be useless for 60% of potential
> clients, using posgresql with the requirement for ms' corrupted ntfs
> means postgresql isn't going to work for it.
I think what you are referring to is
why?
since an app that I'm working on would be useless for 60% of potential
clients, using posgresql with the requirement for ms' corrupted ntfs
means postgresql isn't going to work for it.
since ms does not include a compiler, and the source for 8.0 won't cross
compile from linux. ( gcc 3.3.0
12 matches
Mail list logo
