Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

freetds - Re: [freetds] [PATCH] make replacements more configurable

freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: FreeTDS Development Group

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Craig A. Berry" <craigberry AT mac.com>
  • To: freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [freetds] [PATCH] make replacements more configurable
  • Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 18:16:30 -0600

At 12:57 AM 1/28/2003 -0700, Craig Davison wrote:
>On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 11:37:32PM -0600, Craig A. Berry wrote:

[forward compatibility scenario snipped]

>Sorry to take this further OT, but how can you be sure that future C
>libraries won't define
>some other symbol that freetds defines?

Nothing is 100% sure in this life but it seems quite unlikely the C
standards committee would add functions that collide either with freetds_...
or with one of the public APIs FreeTDS uses. In any case we are only
discussing functions that are already in common use but don't exist
everywhere yet.

>Nothing can be infinitely forward-compatible.

Infinite isn't necessary. A decade or two is probably sufficient and is not
that difficult when designed in from the start.

>Maybe the solution (fictional ignorant COBOL programmer aside) is to get
>autoconf for VMS
>(according to http://vms.gnu.org/tasks.html it will build and work) and send
>patches to
>configure.in etc. That would be very valuable.

That's an excellent suggestion, but unfortunately the work you cite went
dormant several years ago. There is a current GNU on VMS project here:

<http://www.openvms.compaq.com/opensource/opensource.html#gnv>

but I didn't get very far trying to run FreeTDS's Configure through it.
It's probably worth checking back there in a year or so and seeing how far
they've gotten.

>Consider that this project is targeted to UNIX.

It seems a pity to limit it arbitrarily when very trivial changes can remove
that restriction.





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page