FreeTDS Development Group

["James K. Lowden" <jklowden AT freetds.org>]

Igor Korot wrote:
> >From: "James K. Lowden" <jklowden AT freetds.org>
> >Why do you want this?  It's really the way of the past.  The trend is
> >to single-signon.  Drivers poping up dialogs sounds like something from
> >1992.
> 
> Because it's Microsoft documented in MSDN?

IOW, because it's there?  That's why people climb mountains, so I'm told. 

My purpose in hacking FreeTDS isn't to replicate Microsoft's driver.  It's
to make a useful driver.  It's useful by being similar, but similarity per
se is not the goal. Definitely Microsoft's driver is not beautiful enough
to warrant copying for copying's sake in the way that, say, the Mona Lisa
is.   

> >Much better in Win32/64 would be domain-login ability using the Win32
> >API to pass the credentials.  
> 
> Unfortunately I don't have a means to test it on Windows

Nor does anyone.  The feature has not yet been written.  

> I also wonder what will happen with the driver in this case: will
> it fail? do nothing? spits error message about not enough connect info?

Just fail.  Libraries should be totally silent.  They return error codes
that the caller converts into messages.  

--jkl

P.S.  Please look at your email settings.  You might not be aware your
email client is setting the Reply To header to include your email address,
and that you're cc'ing me.  I get two messages and have to be careful to
make sure my reply goes to the list.  By default, any reply goes at least
to you, and maybe to the list.  (If you're not familiar with how Reply To
works, now would be a good time to read up on it.) 

To make matters worse, if I cc you (as the Reply To header requests) I get
a bounce message, "If you would like to be added to my list of approved
senders, please fill out the short request form".  Now, me, I'm Mr.
Equanimity, but others might get irritated.  I'm just going to decline to
participate.  

I would have let you know off-list, but I'm not very good with forms.