Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

freetds - Re: [freetds] 64 Bit Machine Available

freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: FreeTDS Development Group

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Federico Alves" <sales AT minixel.com>
  • To: "'ZIGLIO, Frediano, VF-IT'" <Frediano.Ziglio AT vodafone.com>
  • Cc: freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [freetds] 64 Bit Machine Available
  • Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 23:58:08 -0500

I am trying to compile version 0.83.dev.20080219 and I get this:

T write.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/write.Tpo -c write.c -o write.o >/dev/null 2>&1
if /bin/sh ../../libtool --tag=CC --mode=compile gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.
-I../../include -I../../include -D_FREETDS_LIBRARY_SOURCE -DUNIXODBC
-DHAVE_UNISTD_H -DHAVE_PWD_H -DHAVE_SYS_TYPES_H -DHAVE_LONG_LONG
-DSIZEOF_LONG_INT=4 -D_REENTRANT -D_THREAD_SAFE -DDEBUG=1 -Wall
-Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wno-long-long -pthread -fPIC
-Wdeclaration-after-statement -MT convert.lo -MD -MP -MF ".deps/convert.Tpo"
-c -o convert.lo convert.c; \
then mv -f ".deps/convert.Tpo" ".deps/convert.Plo"; else rm -f
".deps/convert.Tpo"; exit 1; fi
gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../include -I../../include
-D_FREETDS_LIBRARY_SOURCE -DUNIXODBC -DHAVE_UNISTD_H -DHAVE_PWD_H
-DHAVE_SYS_TYPES_H -DHAVE_LONG_LONG -DSIZEOF_LONG_INT=4 -D_REENTRANT
-D_THREAD_SAFE -DDEBUG=1 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes
-Wno-long-long -pthread -fPIC -Wdeclaration-after-statement -MT convert.lo
-MD -MP -MF .deps/convert.Tpo -c convert.c -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/convert.o
convert.c: In function `tds_willconvert':
convert.c:2904: error: duplicate case value
convert.c:2899: error: previously used here
make[4]: *** [convert.lo] Error 1
make[4]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/freetds-0.83.dev.20080219/src/tds'
make[3]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[3]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/freetds-0.83.dev.20080219/src/tds'
make[2]: *** [all] Error 2
make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/freetds-0.83.dev.20080219/src/tds'
make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/freetds-0.83.dev.20080219/src'
make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1

-----Original Message-----
From: ZIGLIO, Frediano, VF-IT [mailto:Frediano.Ziglio AT vodafone.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 10:41 AM
To: Federico Alves
Subject: RE: [freetds] 64 Bit Machine Available

Hi Federico,
thanks for your support. I'll remind your offer when needed. I think that
problem is quite big and will require a lot of time... just to sum up
- Microsoft documentation is wrong, insufficient and not updated. I wrote
some feedback but I know it will take longer
- Linux have two 64-bit ODBC ABI compatibility even using the same DM
(unixODBC)

Here we tested for some ABI for 64-bit and we currently want to provide a
driver which is compatible with any installed DM but till all vendors will
decide an unified 64-bit ODBC API all ODBC developers will have to take very
care developing ODBC applications.

Regards
Frediano Ziglio

> -----Original Message-----
> From: freetds-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
> [mailto:freetds-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Federico Alves
> Sent: lunedì 21 gennaio 2008 15.57
> To: freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: [freetds] 64 Bit Machine Available
>
> Dear Freddy
> I also have a 64 Bit Windows machine available for testing,
> with SQL 2005
> installed. Please contact me via email if you need the
> admininstrator login.
> Federico
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: freetds-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
> [mailto:freetds-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of
> freetds-request AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 3:37 AM
> To: freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: FreeTDS Digest, Vol 60, Issue 31
>
> Send FreeTDS mailing list submissions to
> freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/freetds
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> freetds-request AT lists.ibiblio.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> freetds-owner AT lists.ibiblio.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of FreeTDS digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: FreeTDS Digest, Vol 60, Issue 30 (Federico Alves)
> 2. freetds-0.64 install/configure on Solaris10 all 64-bit env
> using Sun Compiler - ELF64 error (Alek Fiakhretdinov)
> 3. Re: Ongoing work for released version of FreeTDS
> version0,
> 64, 0, 6182 (Dann Corbit)
> 4. Optimizing memory allocation when using dynamic SQL
> (Sebastien FLAESCH)
> 5. Re: FreeTDS Digest, Vol 60, Issue 30 (ZIGLIO, Frediano, VF-IT)
> 6. Re: ODBC on 64 bit linux fix. (ZIGLIO, Frediano, VF-IT)
> 7. Re: ODBC on 64 bit linux fix. (Sebastien FLAESCH)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 16:35:45 -0500
> From: "Federico Alves" <sales AT minixel.com>
> Subject: Re: [freetds] FreeTDS Digest, Vol 60, Issue 30
> To: <freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID: <037301c85a1a$161b8150$425283f0$@com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> If somebody needs a 64 Bit machine for testing, Freddy can
> use the one that
> he knows. He has the IP address and the password. It is a RED
> HAT 5 with
> license.
> Federico
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 18:26:11 -0500
> From: Alek Fiakhretdinov <alek.fiakhretdinov AT db.com>
> Subject: [freetds] freetds-0.64 install/configure on Solaris10 all
> 64-bit env using Sun Compiler - ELF64 error
> To: freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Message-ID:
>
> <OFA1C752DA.A206D6CA-ON852573D4.00792B77-852573D4.0080B7D9 AT db.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
> Dear freetds community,
>
> I am trying to install and configure the latest freetds-0.64
> kit together
> with DBD::Sybase driver on Solaris-10 all 64-bit environment.
> Perl itself has been rebuilt with 'use64bitint=define,
> use64bitall=define'
> options and successfully works with a few database modules (Sybperl,
> DBD::Oracle) - all installed using the same CFLAGS as were
> used during
> Perl installation.
>
> I am using SUN compiler and associated build tools (not gcc).
>
> The problem is that I can't have a loader to use a correct
> set of 64-bit
> libraries during the 'make' step of the FreeTDS installation
> even though
> per my understanding I am providing all necessary info.
>
> Will Greatly (!!!) appreciate any help as I was struggling
> with this for a
> few days with no luck.
>
> Here are the details:
>
> 1. Perl
>
> $ perl -V
> Summary of my perl5 (revision 5 version 10 subversion 0)
> configuration:
> Platform:
> osname=solaris, osvers=2.10, archname=sun4-solaris-64
> uname='sunos nygmwsp011.us.db.com 5.10 generic_118833-33
> sun4u sparc
> sunw,sun-blade-100 '
> config_args='-Dprefix=/usr/perl5/5.10.0 -Duse64bitall
> -Duse64bitint
> -de'
> hint=recommended, useposix=true, d_sigaction=define
> useithreads=undef, usemultiplicity=undef
> useperlio=define, d_sfio=undef, uselargefiles=define,
> usesocks=undef
> use64bitint=define, use64bitall=define, uselongdouble=undef
> usemymalloc=n, bincompat5005=undef
> Compiler:
> cc='cc', ccflags ='-xarch=generic64 -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE
> -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -DPERL_USE_SAFE_PUTENV',
> optimize='-O',
> cppflags='-xarch=generic64'
> ccversion='Sun WorkShop 6 update 1 C 5.2 2000/09/11',
> gccversion='',
> gccosandvers=''
> intsize=4, longsize=8, ptrsize=8, doublesize=8, byteorder=87654321
> d_longlong=define, longlongsize=8, d_longdbl=define,
> longdblsize=16
> ivtype='long', ivsize=8, nvtype='double', nvsize=8,
> Off_t='off_t',
> lseeksize=8
> alignbytes=8, prototype=define
> Linker and Libraries:
> ld='cc', ldflags =' -xarch=generic64
> -L/db/pub/infra/SUNWspro/6.1p9/SUNWspro/WS6U1/lib/v9
> -L/usr/lib/sparcv9
> -L/usr/ccs/lib/sparcv9 '
> libpth=/db/pub/infra/SUNWspro/6.1p9/SUNWspro/WS6U1/lib/v9
> /usr/lib/sparcv9 /usr/ccs/lib/sparcv9 /usr/lib /usr/ccs/lib
> libs=-lsocket -lnsl -ldl -lm -lc
> perllibs=-lsocket -lnsl -ldl -lm -lc
> libc=/usr/lib/sparcv9/libc.so, so=so, useshrplib=false,
> libperl=libperl.a
> gnulibc_version=''
> Dynamic Linking:
> dlsrc=dl_dlopen.xs, dlext=so, d_dlsymun=undef, ccdlflags=' '
> cccdlflags='-KPIC', lddlflags=' -G -xarch=generic64
> -L/db/pub/infra/SUNWspro/6.1p9/SUNWspro/WS6U1/lib/v9
> -L/usr/lib/sparcv9
> -L/usr/ccs/lib/sparcv9'
>
>
> Characteristics of this binary (from libperl):
> Compile-time options: PERL_DONT_CREATE_GVSV PERL_MALLOC_WRAP
> PERL_USE_SAFE_PUTENV USE_64_BIT_ALL
> USE_64_BIT_INT
> USE_LARGE_FILES USE_PERLIO
> Built under solaris
> Compiled at Jan 11 2008 15:59:18
> @INC:
> /usr/perl5/5.10.0/lib/5.10.0/sun4-solaris-64
> /usr/perl5/5.10.0/lib/5.10.0
> /usr/perl5/5.10.0/lib/site_perl/5.10.0/sun4-solaris-64
> /usr/perl5/5.10.0/lib/site_perl/5.10.0
>
>
> 2. Solaris env in my session:
>
> PATH=/usr/xpg4/bin:/usr/ccs/bin:/db/pub/infra/SUNWspro/6.1p9/S
> UNWspro/bin:/u
> sr/bin:.
> CFLAGS=-xarch=generic64 -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64
> -DPERL_USE_SAFE_PUTENV
> LDFLAGS= -xarch=generic64
> -L/db/pub/infra/SUNWspro/6.1p9/SUNWspro/WS6U1/lib/v9
> -L/usr/lib/sparcv9
> -L/usr/ccs/lib/sparcv9
> LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/ccs/lib/sparcv9:/usr/lib/sparcv9:/db/pub/
> infra/SUNWspro
> /6.1p9/SUNWspro/WS6U1/lib/v9
>
> 3. configure
>
> ./configure --disable-odbc --disable-libiconv --enable-sybase-compat
> --prefix=/usr/local/freetds --with-tdsver=7.0
>
> Configure comes up with a libtool which for some reason
> generates a C++ -
> like commands so I have to edit the libtool to change the
> following line:
>
> wl="-Wl,"
>
> to
>
> wl=""
>
> In this case 'make' comes up with the follwoing log:
>
> Which has the following warnings:
>
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "query.c", line 1464: warning: assignment type mismatch:
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> ld: warning: file ./.libs/libtds_objects.a(mem.o): wrong ELF class:
> ELFCLASS64
> ld: warning: file
> ../replacements/.libs/libreplacements.a(iconv.o): wrong
> ELF class: ELFCLASS64
> ld: warning: Symbol referencing errors
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "ct.c", line 767: warning: statement not reached
> "ct.c", line 3925: warning: statement not reached
> "ct.c", line 4186: warning: argument #1 is incompatible with
> prototype:
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "blk.c", line 520: warning: statement not reached
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "dblib.c", line 3499: warning: statement not reached
> "dblib.c", line 4124: warning: initializer does not fit or is out of
> range: 32768
> "dblib.c", line 4770: warning: statement not reached
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "bcp.c", line 1493: warning: statement not reached
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "../../include/tds.h", line 1244: warning: dubious tag
> declaration: struct
> in_addr
> "unittest.c", line 84: warning: assignment type mismatch:
>
> 5. Question: what's wrong in my ENV and how can I have
> the configure
> tool to generate the right libtool, etc. ?
>
>
> Regards,
> =Alek
>
>
> ---
>
> This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged
> information. If you
> are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail
> in error)
> please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any
> unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the
> material in this
> e-mail is strictly forbidden.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 18:30:19 -0800
> From: "Dann Corbit" <DCorbit AT connx.com>
> Subject: Re: [freetds] Ongoing work for released version of FreeTDS
> version0, 64, 0, 6182
> To: "FreeTDS Development Group" <freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID:
>
> <D425483C2C5C9F49B5B7A41F8944154701000BCC AT postal.corporate.connx.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> [snip]
> I said:
> > > There are no guarantees on the addresses alignments that clients
> want to
> > > bind to.
> > >
> > > Consider:
> > > The client creates a memory buffer with the following properties:
> > > For every field there is a leading character which will
> be 1 if the
> > > field is null and zero if the field is not null. Every field will
> also
> > > be stored in the memory buffer using its exact width.
> Now, suppose
> that
> > > the first field in the result set is a single character. Then the
> next
> > > field will start at offset 3. For many CPUs, this will
> cause a bus
> > > error if the succeeding data is simply assigned to a pointer that
> wants
> > > alignment to a type and the type does not support character
> alignment.
> > >
> > > The reason that we made the changes above is that we
> *were* getting
> bus
> > > errors in running some of our regression tests on some platforms.
> > >
> >
> > Mmmm... from msdn (linked from SQLBindCol reference)
> >
> > http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms709306(VS.85).aspx
> >
> > So data should be aligned by program. It's also true that we don't
> live
> > in a perfect world so if you tested that others drivers works in all
> > cases it's worth to write such a workaround. Personally I currently
> > don't have a test environment like this.
>
> You're quite right. The specification clearly says that the
> data should
> be properly aligned. I guess we just altered our source to
> placate the
> customers, and added the problem generator to our regression tests.
>
> I think we will probably just maintain our own version of this file.
> Even though the FreeTDS clearly does the right thing, I think
> it will be
> cheaper for us than fielding technical support calls. So I do repent
> and retract in dust and ashes.
> ;-)
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 12:13:08 +0100
> From: Sebastien FLAESCH <sf AT 4js.com>
> Subject: [freetds] Optimizing memory allocation when using dynamic SQL
> To: FreeTDS Development Group <freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID: <4791DB44.7010600 AT 4js.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Dear all,
>
> Frediano Ziglio wrote:
> > http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms709306(VS.85).aspx
>
> Interesting, I knew about alignment issues, but from an
> optimization point
> of
> view I have always asked myself if doing several malloc() of
> little pieces
> of
> memory is really an issue...
>
> We used to have our own mem allocation wrapper to optimize
> this in our VM
> but
> we have removed it in latest version to just use malloc() as is...
> allocating
> any size of memory...
>
> I really wonder if C runtime library providers (on any
> platform) did not yet
> optimize malloc() to allocate large blocks of memory (I mean, if you
> allocate
> 4 bytes, does it really just allocate 4 bytes or does it pick
> 4b in a memory
> pool
> or whatever and just increment an internal offset)?
>
> This is a real issue for use, as we have different sort of database
> interfaces
> and need to allocate buffers for dynamic SQL result sets...
>
> Note also that such kind of memory optimizations is IMHO not
> significant if
> you compare with database communication... am I wrong?
>
> Any comment/advice is welcome!
>
> Thanks a lot.
>
> ;-)
> Seb
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 09:20:55 +0100
> From: "ZIGLIO, Frediano, VF-IT" <Frediano.Ziglio AT vodafone.com>
> Subject: Re: [freetds] FreeTDS Digest, Vol 60, Issue 30
> To: "FreeTDS Development Group" <freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID:
> <72EBB5FADDA71343B78E1F09FF471F6E452659 AT OBOMEXO02.omnitel.it>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
> >
> > If somebody needs a 64 Bit machine for testing, Freddy can
> > use the one that
> > he knows. He has the IP address and the password. It is a RED
> > HAT 5 with
> > license.
> > Federico
> >
>
> Thanks Federico, in this case I needed a windows 64 machine
> to test some
> MS implementations.
>
> freddy77
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 09:25:53 +0100
> From: "ZIGLIO, Frediano, VF-IT" <Frediano.Ziglio AT vodafone.com>
> Subject: Re: [freetds] ODBC on 64 bit linux fix.
> To: "FreeTDS Development Group" <freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID:
> <72EBB5FADDA71343B78E1F09FF471F6E45265A AT OBOMEXO02.omnitel.it>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
> >
> > We have Windows 64b (with VC++ 8 of course) and Linux 64b
> > machines here...
> >
> > Send us a test program and we'll check if you want.
> >
> > Seb
> >
>
> I wrote a small test at
> http://freetds.cvs.sourceforge.net/freetds/freetds/src/odbc/un
> ittests/te
> st64.c?view=log. This source is a unittest for freetds so it require
> common.c and common.h to compile and PWD file to configure.
>
> It works under win32 and linux x86_64 (I used unixODBC and
> ubuntu 7.10).
>
> Yesterday I managed to get win64 cross compile (thanks to mingw-w64
> project!). Can I send you compiled freetds for win64 to test?
>
> freddy77
>
> > ZIGLIO, Frediano, VF-IT wrote:
> > >> On Jan 18, 10:22am, sf AT 4js.com (Sebastien FLAESCH) wrote:
> > >> -- Subject: Re: [freetds] ODBC on 64 bit linux fix.
> > >>
> > >> | Thank you Steve,
> > >> |
> > >> | Here is what we have tested:
> > >> |
> > >> | CFLAGS="-D BUILD_REAL_64_BIT_MODE" ./configure
> > >> --prefix=/opt3/dbs/tds/0.83 --with-odbc-nodm=/opt3/dbs/uxo/3.0
> > >> |
> > >> | But when compiling, we get:
> > >> |
> > >> | odbc.c:794: conflicting types for `SQLParamOptions'
> > >> | /dbs/64bits/uxo/3.0/include/sqlext.h:1893: previous
> > >> declaration of `SQLParamOptions'
> > >> |
> > >> | Am I missing something or is this what Christos tried to fix?
> > >> |
> > >> | The headers comme from UnixODBC 2.2.12 ...
> > >> |
> > >> | Cheers,
> > >> | Seb
> > >>
> > >> Yes, this is what I fixed.
> > >>
> > >> christos
> > >
> > > See
> http://support.microsoft.com/?scid=kb%3Ben-us%3B298678&x=14&y=7
> > >
> > > Also from our configure.ac
> > >
> > > # check is SQLParamOptions accept SQLULEN
> > > AC_TRY_COMPILE([#if defined(_WIN32) ||
> > defined(WIN32) ||
> > > defined(__MINGW32__)
> > > #include <windows.h>
> > > #endif
> > > #include <sql.h>
> > > #include <sqlext.h>
> > >
> > > SQLRETURN SQL_API SQLParamOptions(SQLHSTMT hstmt,
> > > SQLULEN crow, SQLULEN *pirow) {
> > > return SQL_SUCCESS;
> > > }], [return 0],
> > > AC_DEFINE(TDS_SQLPARAMOPTIONS_SQLLEN, 1,
> > [Define to 1 if
> > > SQLParamOptions accept SQLULEN as arguments]))
> > > )
> > >
> > > but in odbc.c
> > >
> > > SQLRETURN ODBC_API
> > > SQLParamOptions(SQLHSTMT hstmt, SQLULEN crow, SQLULEN FAR * pirow)
> > > {
> > > SQLRETURN res;
> > >
> > > This is a problem in MS specifications... pirow should
> correspond to
> > > SQL_ATTR_PARAMS_PROCESSED_PTR which is not 64-bit according
> > which above
> > > link. Also SQL_ATTR_PARAMS_PROCESSED_PTR (see SQLSetStmtAttr
> > > documentation) maps to IPD SQL_DESC_ROWS_PROCESSED_PTR
> which is not
> > > documented as 64-bit. However SQL_ATTR_ROWS_FETCHED_PTR
> > which correspond
> > > to IRD SQL_DESC_ROWS_PROCESSED_PTR is documented as 64-bit. So is
> > > SQL_DESC_ROWS_PROCESSED_PTR 32 or 64 bit?? Is it 64-bit
> > only for IRD??
> > > Does pirow maps really to SQL_ATTR_PARAMS_PROCESSED_PTR
> > that maps on IPD
> > > SQL_DESC_ROWS_PROCESSED_PTR?
> > >
> > > Someone have a 64-bit windows machine to execute some
> > test?? I can pass
> > > some source test in order to test all that stuff... just to
> > know how MS
> > > implemented its specifications... Is MingW available for 64-bit??
> > >
> > > freddy77
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > FreeTDS mailing list
> > > FreeTDS AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/freetds
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > FreeTDS mailing list
> > FreeTDS AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/freetds
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 09:35:49 +0100
> From: Sebastien FLAESCH <sf AT 4js.com>
> Subject: Re: [freetds] ODBC on 64 bit linux fix.
> To: FreeTDS Development Group <freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID: <47945965.5090006 AT 4js.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Hello Frediano,
>
> Yes please send us the binaries, but please give a clear description
> (step by step) to execute the test.
>
> I known nothing about the regression tests (what is "common.[ch]" or
> the PWD file)?
>
> Do we have to compile the test?
>
> Will you provide us only binaries?
>
> Should we compile the whole HEAD sources on Win64 and run our tests?
>
> Cheers,
> Seb
>
> ZIGLIO, Frediano, VF-IT wrote:
> >> We have Windows 64b (with VC++ 8 of course) and Linux 64b
> >> machines here...
> >>
> >> Send us a test program and we'll check if you want.
> >>
> >> Seb
> >>
> >
> > I wrote a small test at
> >
> http://freetds.cvs.sourceforge.net/freetds/freetds/src/odbc/un
> ittests/te
> > st64.c?view=log. This source is a unittest for freetds so it require
> > common.c and common.h to compile and PWD file to configure.
> >
> > It works under win32 and linux x86_64 (I used unixODBC and
> ubuntu 7.10).
> >
> > Yesterday I managed to get win64 cross compile (thanks to mingw-w64
> > project!). Can I send you compiled freetds for win64 to test?
> >
> > freddy77
> >
> >> ZIGLIO, Frediano, VF-IT wrote:
> >>>> On Jan 18, 10:22am, sf AT 4js.com (Sebastien FLAESCH) wrote:
> >>>> -- Subject: Re: [freetds] ODBC on 64 bit linux fix.
> >>>>
> >>>> | Thank you Steve,
> >>>> |
> >>>> | Here is what we have tested:
> >>>> |
> >>>> | CFLAGS="-D BUILD_REAL_64_BIT_MODE" ./configure
> >>>> --prefix=/opt3/dbs/tds/0.83 --with-odbc-nodm=/opt3/dbs/uxo/3.0
> >>>> |
> >>>> | But when compiling, we get:
> >>>> |
> >>>> | odbc.c:794: conflicting types for `SQLParamOptions'
> >>>> | /dbs/64bits/uxo/3.0/include/sqlext.h:1893: previous
> >>>> declaration of `SQLParamOptions'
> >>>> |
> >>>> | Am I missing something or is this what Christos tried to fix?
> >>>> |
> >>>> | The headers comme from UnixODBC 2.2.12 ...
> >>>> |
> >>>> | Cheers,
> >>>> | Seb
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes, this is what I fixed.
> >>>>
> >>>> christos
> >>> See
> http://support.microsoft.com/?scid=kb%3Ben-us%3B298678&x=14&y=7
> >>>
> >>> Also from our configure.ac
> >>>
> >>> # check is SQLParamOptions accept SQLULEN
> >>> AC_TRY_COMPILE([#if defined(_WIN32) ||
> >> defined(WIN32) ||
> >>> defined(__MINGW32__)
> >>> #include <windows.h>
> >>> #endif
> >>> #include <sql.h>
> >>> #include <sqlext.h>
> >>>
> >>> SQLRETURN SQL_API SQLParamOptions(SQLHSTMT hstmt,
> >>> SQLULEN crow, SQLULEN *pirow) {
> >>> return SQL_SUCCESS;
> >>> }], [return 0],
> >>> AC_DEFINE(TDS_SQLPARAMOPTIONS_SQLLEN, 1,
> >> [Define to 1 if
> >>> SQLParamOptions accept SQLULEN as arguments]))
> >>> )
> >>>
> >>> but in odbc.c
> >>>
> >>> SQLRETURN ODBC_API
> >>> SQLParamOptions(SQLHSTMT hstmt, SQLULEN crow, SQLULEN FAR * pirow)
> >>> {
> >>> SQLRETURN res;
> >>>
> >>> This is a problem in MS specifications... pirow should
> correspond to
> >>> SQL_ATTR_PARAMS_PROCESSED_PTR which is not 64-bit according
> >> which above
> >>> link. Also SQL_ATTR_PARAMS_PROCESSED_PTR (see SQLSetStmtAttr
> >>> documentation) maps to IPD SQL_DESC_ROWS_PROCESSED_PTR
> which is not
> >>> documented as 64-bit. However SQL_ATTR_ROWS_FETCHED_PTR
> >> which correspond
> >>> to IRD SQL_DESC_ROWS_PROCESSED_PTR is documented as 64-bit. So is
> >>> SQL_DESC_ROWS_PROCESSED_PTR 32 or 64 bit?? Is it 64-bit
> >> only for IRD??
> >>> Does pirow maps really to SQL_ATTR_PARAMS_PROCESSED_PTR
> >> that maps on IPD
> >>> SQL_DESC_ROWS_PROCESSED_PTR?
> >>>
> >>> Someone have a 64-bit windows machine to execute some
> >> test?? I can pass
> >>> some source test in order to test all that stuff... just to
> >> know how MS
> >>> implemented its specifications... Is MingW available for 64-bit??
> >>>
> >>> freddy77
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> FreeTDS mailing list
> >>> FreeTDS AT lists.ibiblio.org
> >>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/freetds
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> FreeTDS mailing list
> >> FreeTDS AT lists.ibiblio.org
> >> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/freetds
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > FreeTDS mailing list
> > FreeTDS AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/freetds
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> FreeTDS mailing list
> FreeTDS AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/freetds
>
>
> End of FreeTDS Digest, Vol 60, Issue 31
> ***************************************
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> FreeTDS mailing list
> FreeTDS AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/freetds
>





  • Re: [freetds] 64 Bit Machine Available, Federico Alves, 02/19/2008

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page