Hi,
On Mon, 14 Apr 2003 08:42:07 +, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> * Matthias Urlichs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-04-11 14:34]:
>> Whatever happened to the idea of using a common database access library
>> like iODBC? It's reasonably small, Not A Burden if you happen to not
>> require any database look
* Matthias Urlichs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-04-11 14:34]:
> Personally, I do not like all those -mysql, -pgsql, -whatever packages.
>
> Whatever happened to the idea of using a common database access library
> like iODBC? It's reasonably small, Not A Burden if you happen to not
> require any data
On Friday 11 April 2003 16:34, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> * Programs which access SQL databases should do so through
> libgda2/unixodbc/???.
>
> ... assuming that we can reach some sort of consensus on which library
> should be used..?
Why is a consesus needed?
I agree with you that having each p
On Fri, Apr 11, 2003 at 04:34:00PM +0200, Matthias Urlichs arranged a set of
bits into the following:
> Hi,
> > * Package name: exim-mysql
>
> Personally, I do not like all those -mysql, -pgsql, -whatever packages.
>
> Whatever happened to the idea of using a common database access library
>
Matthias Urlichs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> * Package name: exim-mysql
> Personally, I do not like all those -mysql, -pgsql, -whatever packages.
Who does? :-(
> Whatever happened to the idea of using a common database access library
> like iODBC? It's reasonably small, Not A Burden if you
Hi,
> * Package name: exim-mysql
Personally, I do not like all those -mysql, -pgsql, -whatever packages.
Whatever happened to the idea of using a common database access library
like iODBC? It's reasonably small, Not A Burden if you happen to not
require any database lookup features, and it do
6 matches
Mail list logo
