FreeTDS Development Group

[Nick Gorham <nick AT lurcher.org>]

Frediano Ziglio wrote:

> Il dom, 2004-01-11 alle 01:25, Castellano, Nicholas ha scritto:
>  
>
> > > From: James K. Lowden [mailto:jklowden AT schemamania.org] 
> > > Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2004 5:16 AM
> > > To: FreeTDS Development Group
> > > Subject: Re: [freetds] ODBC unit tests "funccall" and "transaction"
> > >
> > > My last information was that your test boxes run 
> > > unixODBC-2.2.6, and Freddy tells us unixODBC-2.2.7 is just 
> > > broken, and not only for FreeTDS. 
> > > Is that accurate?  
> > >      
> > Yes, the 0.62 release notes should definitely say to use 2.2.6 and avoid
> > 2.2.7.  I still have 2.0.11 on the Digital UNIX system, so that machine
> > doesn't pass the "transaction" test, but I'm confident that it would if I
> > upgraded to 2.2.6 (which I'm currently not at liberty to do).
> >
> >    
>
> Yesterday Nick Gorham replied to my mail and confirm the problem. 2.2.7
> is quite broken... Nick is working to fix the problem and release a
> 2.2.8 version ASAP. It give to me a patch (already in unixODBC CVS) but
> it do not fix all problems. I tried also to update our
> SQLExecute/SQLExecDirect to return correct SQL_NO_DATA value (this
> should be correct result is no data) however more tests fails :( so I
> leave the code as is (even if do not respect specification in this
> direction)... 
>
>  
Hang on, I didn't say that at all, SQLMoreResults is broken, but AFAIK 
nothing else. I said that I don't want to release 2.2.8 if I can avoid 
it, with only one bug fix.

If you know of any other problems in the DM please let me know.

--
Nick

I have a red sign on my door.
It says "If this sign is blue, you're moving too fast."