FreeTDS Development Group

["Lowden, James K" <LowdenJK AT bernstein.com>]

> From: Brian Bruns [mailto:camber AT ais.org]
> Sent: July 8, 2002 3:50 PM
> 
> maybe tonight if I can fix the !@#$
> autoconf macro to stop finding Linux as having the wrong 
> getservbyname_r signature.

Ack.  I hope my applying that patch last night didn't get in your way.  

> OSF/1 as usual seems to be the oddball.  I think the linux and solaris
> styles will be pretty evident if they're wrong, you game for 
> some Tru64 testing?

RSN.  I have a small demo coming up on my OSF/1 box, so I'd like to leave it
alone until then.  

What I never solved with OSF/1 was shared libraries with iconv.  You
suggested grabbing libiconv, but I'm pretty sure that wouldn't actually
help, because under OSF/1 (my version, at least), the .so can't have any
unresolved references of its own.  So, it's a matter of how the .so is
built, not which implementation to use.  If I understand it correctly, I
think this may become a support problem.  I myself can work around it, so if
it's just me, it's just me.  

My OSF/1 header file looks like this, BTW:

$ egrep  'get....byname_r' /usr/include/netdb.h
extern int gethostbyname_r __((const char *, struct hostent *, struct
hostent_data *));
extern int getservbyname_r __((const char *, const char *, struct servent *,
struct servent_data *));


> BTW, is everyone comfortable with using './configure; make
> CFLAGS=-D_REENTRANT' as a method of building FreeTDS with all 
> the thread
> safe stuff?  I'd prefer to have it optional for the time being, until
> later in the 0.6x series anyway.

should it be "--with-threads" or something like that, eventually?  

> I made a couple UG changes (light stuff) but I'll get them 
> checked in at the same time.  

I'm working on the Appendices at the moment, no conflict there.  

> Also, can anyone with SQL Server 2000 comment on how the TDS 
> 8.0 support
> is...it's still labeled experimental or broken in the docs, 
> i'd like to be specific on how usable it is.

I haven't done anything with it since my "killer query".  I expect to
rebuild and re-test after the little demo.  I'm working with the assumption
that TDS 8.0 works as well as TDS 7.0, or will before 0.60 is released.  

> And hopefully we clobbered the 99% cpu problem, if we could get some
> testing when pre2 comes out that'd be great to have it wrapped up for
> 0.60.

Oh?  I saw a pile of patches go in, but I didn't realize you'd fixed that.  

> Other than that, I haven't been keeping the NEWS file up to 
> date like I
> said I was gonna, so I once again need to go fishing through the
> source/cvs logs/change logs to get a feature list for the 
> announcement.

Hmm.  I probably haven't been much help re the ChangeLog, but the cvs logs
should help.  

Policy question:  Why is there a ChangeLog file and how are its contents
supposed to be different from the cvs log?  

--jkl