Re: Status of BUILD_REAL_64_BIT_MODE?
Nick Gorham <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.db.unixodbc.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
ZIGLIO, Frediano, VF-IT wrote: >>I'm wondering how sane it is to consider turning on >>BUILD_REAL_64_BIT_MODE in a 64-bit Linux distribution (I'm responsible >>for Red Hat's packaging of unixODBC, if you're wondering). >>The comments >>in sqltypes.h about it are pretty discouraging, but maybe >>that's obsolete >>information now? >> >>I trolled the archives a bit and found >>http://mailman.unixodbc.org/pipermail/unixodbc-dev/2008-Januar >>y/001139.html >>which suggests that Debian is enabling it but found several additional >>fixes necessary. Comments on the correctness/completeness of that >>patch would be especially useful. >> >> regards, tom lane >> >> > >I wrote the mail :) > >IMHO we should push BUILD_REAL_64_BIT_MODE like Debian does. The main reason is that main >ODBC platform (win64) use it! Converging all to a single definition is better. >After many posts to Microsoft I get this page >http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms716287(VS.85).aspx! There are currently some >issues (for instance SQLROWSETSIZE should be SQLULEN, not SQLUINTEGER) but mostly should >work. The real problem is drivers which should be checked better but I think that if >Debian is compiling unixODBC with BUILD_REAL_64_BIT_MODE defined they already fixed many >issues for you :) > >Frediano Ziglio > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Yes, I agree, as I said I have made it the default in 2.2.13, now I have the mailing list back up, the only thing thats stopping me releasing it is a bit of testing from someone other than myself, so peeps, please try it and let me know. -- Nick Gorham Easysoft Limited http://www.easysoft.com, http://www.unixODBC.org _______________________________________________ unixODBC-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.unixodbc.org/mailman/listinfo/unixodbc-dev