From: Brian Candler <B.Candler@...>
Date: 2003-05-02T23:42:29+09:00
Subject: Re: Some OCI8 comments

On Fri, May 02, 2003 at 10:53:46PM +0900, KUBO Takehiro wrote:
> Does gcc make 32 bit object in any case? If so, I'll change oraconf.rb
> as following.

Unfortunately I know little about Solaris, and I don't have a Sun 'cc' to
compare with 'gcc'

I'm not convinced it's specific to Oracle 9.2 problem. The box where I had
this problem was running gcc 3.1. I've just gone back to the older box
(running 9.0.1 / gcc 2.95.3) and compiled ruby-oci8-0.1.3 and it does
compile without patching. However the demo.mk has both 'build' and 'build32'
targets, just the same as Oracle 9.2

It's not impossible that I had frigged something manually in those Makefiles
a long time ago to make it compile, I can't be sure; or it might be a gcc
2.95.3/3.1 difference.

Perhaps it would be better as an option to extconf.rb, like
   --force-32bit
or something.

> >   The latter is, I believe, a more accurate ISO date format. It also happens
> >   to be the same as mysql provides.
> 
> Hmm, I don't accept your patch about this.
> 
> If I change that format, I'll do it on major version up.
> On minor version up users will expect that the program running on
> older version will run on newer version without change. Your patch may
> cause problems on some other programs.
> 
> In addition OraDate will be obsolete or deprecated on the next major
> release. OCIDate (see $ORACLE_HOME/rdbms/demo/orl.h) or OCI::Date will
> be used instead of OraDate. You can change default format as following.
>     OCIDate.format = 'YYYY-MM-DD HH24:MM:SS'

That solves the problem nicely, thank you.

Cheers,

Brian.