Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

freetds - Re: [freetds] [Bug Report] Missing Winsock initialization in v0.82

freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: FreeTDS Development Group

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Harry Sfougaris <hsfougaris AT gmail.com>
  • To: FreeTDS Development Group <freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [freetds] [Bug Report] Missing Winsock initialization in v0.82
  • Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 08:49:25 +0300

If I may also add my 2 cents:

> - provide compiled applications ? I would so, but not necessary

I believe there should also be compiled applications (especially in
straightforward OSs like Windows and OSX).
I would think that most developers are interested in just using the
libraries, and don't need or really want to compile themselves, but they are
currently forced to.

> - as dll or as static libraries? Personally I'd prefer dll.
If dll means more compatibility between the various compilers available under
Windows (from what I understood from a previous message, .lib are not really
compatible), then that would definitely be preferred.
It would be a shame to have a cross platform library that only works with
solutions built specifically with Visual Studio.

Thanks,
Harry

On 14 Μαϊ 2010, at 1:16 π.μ., Paul Thurston wrote:

> Frediano:
>
> Agreed that the Windows distribution is sorely in need of an overhaul.
> How about if we just ease to this at first?
>
> Can we just put together, say, a VC10 solution together that build the
> dlls?
> Something like getting dblib.lib, libTDS.lib, FreeTDS.lib and FreeTDS.dll ?
>
> As Damien noticed, the static libs are gigantic, because everything is
> being sucked in & statically linked,
> I too prefer the DLLs.
>
> Would it be reasonable to take the old msvc6 project and upgrade it to
> msvc10?
> If you like, I could work on this.
>
> Paul
>
>
> From: freetds-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
> [mailto:freetds-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Frediano Ziglio
> Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 6:00 PM
> To: FreeTDS Development Group
> Subject: Re: [freetds] [Bug Report] Missing Winsock initialization in v0.82
>
>
> 2010/5/13 Paul Thurston
> <pthurston AT netegrate.com<mailto:pthurston AT netegrate.com>>:
>
>> Damien:
>
>>
>
>> I agree with you. If we set-up, say, CMake, it would be analogous to the
>> gmake set-up on Unix.
>
>> With enough CMake switches, users could easily configure their favorite
>> build flavor.
>
>>
>
>> Paul
>
>>
>
>>
>
>
>
> I'm not again inserting new VS projects files to the
> repository/distribution however I think there are already too much
> different windows project files and they are even very different !!
>
> Currently
>
> - Dev-C++ project (odbc only)
>
> - ms vc6++ files (dblib, odbc and libTDS also files for unittests, the more
> complete and obsolete one)
>
> - Nmakefile for VS (dblib and apps)
>
> - VS 2005 project files (dblib and libTDS) There is also a source NSI
> installer for odbc! Some projects produce static libraries while other
> dll... quite a bunch of alternatives!
>
>
>
> I'm working on FreeTDS so much that I think I know the exactly position and
> history of every file... this help in many way but is a problem in
> others... many things are taken for granted. Reading some recently mails
> reveals that packaging is REALLY WRONG (at least about Windows). I thought
> anybody would just unpack distribution and start a build quite easy but
> this is not true. Happily I passed a "make dist-zip" to a collegue of mine
> and got a compile without any hints,,, perhaps it's an Italian way of
> thinking...
>
>
>
> I think that before adding other files is better to define what we want to
> provide, remove old and obsolete stuff and write some document (a
> README.windows ??).
>
>
>
> Some question
>
> - which libraries? I think all main libraries (dblib, ctlib and odbc while
> replacements and libTDS just static and not installed)
>
> - as dll or as static libraries? Personally I'd prefer dll.
>
> - provide compiled applications ? I would so, but not necessary









Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page