reassign 354723 unixodbc
thanks
On 2 March 2006 at 14:22, Steve Langasek wrote:
| On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 11:10:56PM +0100, Johannes Ranke wrote:
| > > | So with RODBC the only variable here, I'm still pretty sure it's an
RODBC
| > > | bug.
|
| > I just built r-cran-rodbc 1.1.3 on my unstable box - the problem is
| > back! If I reinstall the version from stable, it goes away again (and so
| > on:)
|
| Hah, ok, you beat me to it. :)
|
| Alright, I'll try to take a look at what could be different between unixodbc
| 2.2.4 and unixodbc 2.2.11 that would be triggering this. I have an amd64
| system I can test on, so hopefully the problem will be reproducible.
That sounds more like it. The upstream author/maintainer of RODBC is pretty
experienced in matters relating to 64bit having had access to 64bit Solaris
"forever". I don't think that it is a simple cast or something like that
tripping up RODBC. And as I said, it's code has changed little, and RODBC is
being used quite a bit.
Now, that doesn't mean it must be unixodbc, but I would simply assign a
higher probability to that case. Hence I'm reassigning as predicted by
Steve :)
Dirk
--
Hell, there are no rules here - we're trying to accomplish something.
-- Thomas A. Edison
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
