From: | "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | <pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: 64 Bit patch (WAS: psqlodbc developer) |
Date: | 2004-07-02 10:14:10 |
Message-ID: | E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E40C3828@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: 02 July 2004 10:06
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [ODBC] 64 Bit patch (WAS: psqlodbc developer)
>
> Am Freitag, 2. Juli 2004 10:45 schrieben Sie:
> > I've forwarded this patch to the list for review before
> it's applied
> > (I don't use IODBC).
>
> If one uses iODBC then the include files are picked up from
> the installed version of iODBC. The files iodbc.h, isql.h,
> etc. in the source tree are sort of obsolete. They are only
> used for the "neither unixODBC nor iODBC"
> version of the driver, which is quite useless.
In which case, should they be removed to force the user to install
either iODBC or unixODBC first?
Regards, Dave.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dave Page | 2004-07-02 10:24:49 | Re: Volunteer psqlODBC Developer Required |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2004-07-02 09:05:37 | Re: 64 Bit patch (WAS: psqlodbc developer) |