[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       freetds
Subject:    RE: [freetds] ODBC unit tests "funccall" and "transaction"
From:       Frediano Ziglio <freddyz77 () tin ! it>
Date:       2004-01-11 9:58:55
Message-ID: 1073815135.3451.4.camel () freddy
[Download RAW message or body]

Il dom, 2004-01-11 alle 01:25, Castellano, Nicholas ha scritto:
> > From: James K. Lowden [mailto:jklowden@schemamania.org] 
> > Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2004 5:16 AM
> > To: FreeTDS Development Group
> > Subject: Re: [freetds] ODBC unit tests "funccall" and "transaction"
> > 
> > My last information was that your test boxes run 
> > unixODBC-2.2.6, and Freddy tells us unixODBC-2.2.7 is just 
> > broken, and not only for FreeTDS. 
> > Is that accurate?  
> 
> Yes, the 0.62 release notes should definitely say to use 2.2.6 and avoid
> 2.2.7.  I still have 2.0.11 on the Digital UNIX system, so that machine
> doesn't pass the "transaction" test, but I'm confident that it would if I
> upgraded to 2.2.6 (which I'm currently not at liberty to do).
> 

Yesterday Nick Gorham replied to my mail and confirm the problem. 2.2.7
is quite broken... Nick is working to fix the problem and release a
2.2.8 version ASAP. It give to me a patch (already in unixODBC CVS) but
it do not fix all problems. I tried also to update our
SQLExecute/SQLExecDirect to return correct SQL_NO_DATA value (this
should be correct result is no data) however more tests fails :( so I
leave the code as is (even if do not respect specification in this
direction)... 

freddy77


_______________________________________________
FreeTDS mailing list
FreeTDS@lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/freetds
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]