Re: OSX ?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Horacio Samaniego <Horacio(at)unm(dot)edu>
Cc: pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: OSX ?
Date: 2005-11-15 03:02:39
Message-ID: 5615.1132023759@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-odbc

Horacio Samaniego <Horacio(at)unm(dot)edu> writes:
> I 've tried to compile psqlODBC from ftp://ftp.postgresql.org/pub/
> odbc/versions/src/psqlodbc-08.01.0101.tar.gz with no success...

Hm, it fails for me too. I'm not sure if it's OS X's fault or
psqlodbc's fault, but the problem seems to be here:

pgapifunc.h declares PGAPI_BindParameter as taking

SQLUINTEGER cbColDef,
...
SQLINTEGER cbValueMax,
SQLINTEGER *pcbValue);

The actual definition of PGAPI_BindParameter in bind.c uses different
typedefs:

UDWORD cbColDef,
...
SDWORD cbValueMax,
SDWORD * pcbValue)

Darwin's /usr/include/sqltypes.h has

/*
* API declaration data types
*/
typedef signed int SQLINTEGER;
typedef unsigned int SQLUINTEGER;

/*
* SQL portable types for C
*/
typedef long int SDWORD;
typedef unsigned long int UDWORD;

and gcc is entirely within its rights to complain that "int" != "long int".

*Somebody* is not on the right page here. I would tend to fault
psqlodbc for inconsistent declarations, but if it works on other
platforms (as it seems to) maybe there is a general convention
that SQLINTEGER == SDWORD etc? If so, Apple didn't get the word.

regards, tom lane

In response to

  • OSX ? at 2005-11-14 19:42:38 from Horacio Samaniego

Browse pgsql-odbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Anoop Kumar 2005-11-15 04:25:26 Re: Recommended ODBC version for compilation
Previous Message Dave Page 2005-11-14 20:24:44 Re: Recommended ODBC version for compilation