* Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010324 17:35]:
> Tom Lane writes:
>
> > Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > I'll take the deafening silence as a NO?
> >
> > I was (a) waiting to see what Peter thought about it,
>
> Don't ask me, I don't know what this does...
>
> > and (b)
Tom Lane writes:
> Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I'll take the deafening silence as a NO?
>
> I was (a) waiting to see what Peter thought about it,
Don't ask me, I don't know what this does...
> and (b) wondering
> whether you'd actually tested to see that the built ODBC driver
Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'll take the deafening silence as a NO?
I was (a) waiting to see what Peter thought about it, and (b) wondering
whether you'd actually tested to see that the built ODBC driver does
something useful. I'm not eager to risk a post-RC1 change that could
t;>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
> On 3/22/01, 4:02:45 PM, Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding Re:
> [HACKERS] odbc/UnixWare 7.1.1: No Go. :
>
>
> > OK
Can I get a go/nogo decision on whether these two functions can be #if'd
out for 7.1?
Thanks.
LER
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 3/22/01, 4:02:45 P
OK, it *IS* just a WARNING that the symbols are undefined.
SO, can we get the _fini/_init stuff commented/taken out for 7.1?
LER
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
;<<<<<<<<<<<
On 3/22/01, 3:38:59 PM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding Re:
[HACKERS] odbc/UnixWare 7.1.1: No Go. :
> Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > My question is WHY are we using -Bsymbolic and/or -z text anyway?
&
Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My question is WHY are we using -Bsymbolic and/or -z text anyway?
> These options don't appear to buy us anything but grief on SVR[45] ELF
> systems..
I have no idea what -z text means to your linker, but if it has a
-Bsymbolic option then it's a good
l Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 3/22/01, 2:50:53 PM, Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding
Re: [HACKERS] odbc/UnixWare 7.1.1: No Go. :
> Larry Rosenman writes:
> > need to kill the _init too. Then we get other symbol
Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> need to kill the _init too. Then we get other symbol issues, I think due
> to -Wl,z,text, but I'm not sure.
Um. This suggests that the real problem is a completely wrong approach
to linking the shared lib. On this evidence I'm not going to touch t
and before you ask, the _init and _fini NEED to go away.
LER
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 3/22/01, 1:00:08 PM, Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrot
Peter,
I'm not a GNU MAKE person, can you help here?
LER
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 3/22/01, 12:49:10 PM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote re
ge <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 3/22/01, 12:23:57 PM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding Re:
[HACKERS] odbc/UnixWare 7.1.1: No Go. :
> Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Does this mean it's eligible
Larry Rosenman writes:
> using the following link, with the _init/_fini killed, works:
>
> cc -G *.o -L /usr/local/pgsql/lib -lpq -R/usr/local/pgsql/lib -lsocket -o
> libpsqlodbc.so.0.26
The libpq should definitely not be there, but if additional libraries such
as -lsocket make you happy then lo
write libm.so
> ilogb libm.so
> frexpl libm.so
> UX:ld: WARNING: Symbol referencing errors.
> rm -f libpsqlodbc.so.0
> ln -s libpsqlodbc.so.0.26 libpsqlodbc.so.0
> rm -f libpsqlodbc.so
>
;>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 3/22/01, 12:23:57 PM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding Re:
[HACKERS] odbc/UnixWare 7.1.1: No Go. :
> Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > D
Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Does this mean it's eligible to be fixed for 7.1?
We can talk about it anyway. Does removing the _fini alone make it work
for you, or do we have to remove _init too?
regards, tom lane
---(end of broad
Does this mean it's eligible to be fixed for 7.1?
LER
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 3/22/01, 11:05:29 AM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote re
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It's supposed to work transparently for the library user. At least the
> _fini can probably be hooked in atexit, but the _init would probably have
> to be handled some other way.
The _fini does nothing, and I already made a hack to cover lack of the
In a very quick look I just made, I tend to agree with Tom, that the
whole non-gcc, non-windows stuff should go.
LER
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On
>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
> On 3/22/01, 10:16:03 AM, Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding
> Re: [HACKERS] odbc/UnixWare 7.1.1: No Go.:
>
>
> > Larry Rosenman writes:
>
> &
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Larry Rosenman writes:
>> Why do WE define _fini?
> Because we need to 'fini' something, I suspect.
See src/interfaces/odbc/psqlodbc.c line 126. It doesn't look to me like
the _fini() does anything useful; could we take it out?
We do not actually
Can't we do something with atexit or other PORTABLE end stuff?
I'll look at it for 7.2.
LER
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 3/22/01, 10:16:03 A
Larry Rosenman writes:
> cc -G -Wl,-z,text -Wl,-h,libpsqlodbc.so.0 -Wl,-Bsymbolic info.o bind.o columninfo.o
>connection.o convert.o drvconn.o environ.o execute.o lobj.o misc.o options.o
>pgtypes.o psqlodbc.o qresult.o results.o socket.o parse.o statement.o gpps.o tuple.o
>tuplelist.o dlg_spec
* Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010321 23:08]:
> Works fine here.
on a GCC platform, it does. I suspect this is a portability issue.
LER
>
>
> > Since I am playing with StarOffice, I figured I'd try --with-odbc,
> > current sources, except for the big Bruce commit I just saw :-)
> >
>
Works fine here.
> Since I am playing with StarOffice, I figured I'd try --with-odbc,
> current sources, except for the big Bruce commit I just saw :-)
>
>
> UX:tsort: INFO: psqlodbc.o
> UX:tsort: INFO: dlg_specific.o
> UX:tsort: INFO: convert.o
> UX:tsort: WARNING: Cycle in
26 matches
Mail list logo
