From: | "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, <pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Promoting the enhanced branch |
Date: | 2006-04-10 12:29:50 |
Message-ID: | E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E4011C9B8C@ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-odbc |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Eisentraut [mailto:peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net]
> Sent: 10 April 2006 12:50
> To: pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Cc: Dave Page
> Subject: Re: [ODBC] Promoting the enhanced branch
>
> Am Samstag, 8. April 2006 21:01 schrieb Dave Page:
> > 7) Updated all libnames to psqlodbc35w.(so|lib|dylib|whatever).
>
> What is that supposed to accomplish? If we're dropping the
> Unicode/ANSI dichotomy, I'd rather go back to plain
> psqlodbc.so for the Unix builds. I'm not sure about the
> exact implications on Windows. But in general I think this
> will just annoy people if they have to change their
> configurations for no apparent reason.
Consistency with the actual ODBC version supported - it was
psqlodbc30w.so
(http://cvs.pgfoundry.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/psqlodbc/psqlodbc/Makefile.
am?rev=1.11.2.4&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup&only_with_tag=REL-07_0
3_ENHANCED) which is clearly wrong if the default build is for ODBC
3.51.
I have no objection if you want to change it to psqlodbc.so though. On
Windows it's a non-issue, though personally I would prefer it to be
psqlodbc.dll. I'd also like to drop the naming variations in psqlodbc.h,
but I'm wary of being too hasty to do that.
Regards, Dave.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-04-10 15:39:18 | Re: Promoting the enhanced branch |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2006-04-10 11:49:34 | Re: Promoting the enhanced branch |