On 14-07-2007 10:06:35 +0200, Niels Nes wrote: > On Sat, Jul 14, 2007 at 10:03:32AM +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote: > > On 14-07-2007 09:43:49 +0200, Niels Nes wrote: > > > On Sat, Jul 14, 2007 at 09:08:55AM +0200, Stefan Manegold wrote: > > > > Ok, before we start changing these things back and forth: > > > > > > > > Anyone else who has an opinion on how M4 (server), M5 (server), SQL4, > > > > SQL5, > > > > XQuery(4) should reveal their version numbers at startup-/module-loading > > > > time, and whether the differences between M4 & M5 should/need to be > > > > increased by having different/non-aligned/"inconsistend" welcome > > > > messages? > > > > Face it. The architecture is inconsistent. In M4 your "on port " > > message was sort of correct and useful, while on M5 this is > > incorrect/irrelevant. > Why ?
Because if you use auto-sensing, then the port may be something else. Something that M5 + Sabaoth + Merovingian heavily depends on. That's why Sabaoth now prints the connection that actually is used on M5 to do the equivalence of Stefan's original "on port %d" message. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ Monetdb-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/monetdb-developers
