Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

freetds - Re: UG clarification

freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: FreeTDS Development Group

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Brian Bruns" <camber AT ais.org>
  • To: freetds AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
  • Subject: Re: UG clarification
  • Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 15:48:06 -0400


> > From: Brian Bruns [mailto:camber AT ais.org]
> > Sent: June 12, 2002 2:28 PM
>
> > SybSQL reads
> > $SYBASE/interfaces for a list
> > of servers, I know this issue came up in the list and we
> > discussed writing
> > a freetds.conf -> interfaces converter. Did anything become
> > of this, or
> > should I write one and put it in the apps directory?
>
> I sent you a perl script converter back in my precommitterbit days; I can
> add it to CVS.

Being the masochist that I am, I wrote a shell script while waiting for an
answer...it's ugly but works. Perl is probably the better route.

> Wanna be really fancy (no, but...)? Make $SYBASE/interfaces a FIFO and
> write to it from libtds when by processing freetds.conf at load time (might
> have to fork(2)). Then, anyone who reads "interfaces" gets what they want
> to know, and no one can mistakenly write to it.
>
> That would keep 'em confused for a while. :)

Wow, that's just cruel! ;-) With 3 APIs and 4 protocol versions the
permutations are already a bit hard to manage, I'm not sure I see the
gain. someone/something has to update the file, the conversion could just
be run at that time. I think the interfaces -> conf file trip is more
common than vs. versa for the reason you mention. SybSQL is the only
application I know of that directly relies on interfaces (that is, instead
of relying on the API to read the interfaces file behind the scenes).
I've got the UG update for SybSQL completed, are you going to sync with
CVS at some point or should I send the snippit along to you for merging
(it's in docbook format already)?

> I'm only half kidding. I know some sites pass around an interfaces file
> that is shared among Sybase- and FreeTDS-based hosts. But if there's no
> interfaces files, why not a FIFO for technical compatibility? Assuming
> someone had the time and interest, of course.

Newer version of openclient support server lookups through LDAP, which
I've thought is a really intriguing idea.

> --jkl

Brian




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page