Adrian Blakey adrian at alexa.com
Tue Dec 14 18:05:34 EST 1999

Firstly, FreeTDS is a godsend -- thank you.

I am testing TDS .5 on RH Linux against a MS SS Ver 7.0.

I got and tried to make DBD::FreeTDS 0.02, but it does not seem to be
maintained judging from the compile errors.

So I have been testing with DBD::Sybase, built using the FreeTDS libs.

Things mostly work, however error handling and reporting is not up to the
same level as if DBD::Sybase were linked with the Sybase libs.

So I wonder if there would be any point in forking the DBD::Sybase codeline
and doing a better job of providing a DBD::FreeTDS?

This makes me wonder about about impedance matches between the libs,
protocol and server.

Sybase considers ctLib its annointed interface to TDS 5.0 and Adaptive
Server Enterprise. And they probably do not want to help out MS by extending

Microsoft has no ctLib implementation and is interested in furthering dbLib
as the interface to TDS 7.0 and Sql Server.

FreeTDS exports TDS 7.0 functionality through the reimplemented FreeTDS
ctLib -- there is no dblib (rightly so). Therefore, are there ctLib
functions which either behave differently or not at all when directed at a
MS database? So will it be necessary to implement some ctLib functions that
are not part of the Sybase "standard" library to support MS?

More information about the FreeTDS mailing list