mpeppler at peppler.org
Tue Dec 14 18:12:58 EST 1999
Adrian Blakey writes:
> 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.
You are correct. I actually think that it should be removed from
> 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.
I'd love to get some specifics on this.
> 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?
I'm not convinced that DBD::Sybase can't be made to behave correctly
with both implementations, but I'm open to suggestions. In any case
the DBD::Sybase code isn't all that complicated :-)
> 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.
Doesn't Microsoft push ODBC over DBlibrary?
> 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?
I guess Brian and/or others who are using the TDS 7 stuff will have to
step in here...
Michael Peppler -||- Data Migrations Inc.
mpeppler at peppler.org -||- http://www.mbay.net/~mpeppler
Int. Sybase User Group -||- http://www.isug.com
Sybase on Linux mailing list: ase-linux-list at isug.com
More information about the FreeTDS