On the fedora VM i tried, I fully de-installed the UnixODBC RPMS, so the one built from source should be the only one present.
Will take a look at the pyodbc files.. On Sep 12, 2011, at 3:27 PM, Victor Olex wrote: > I confirm successful build and run time on both 64-bit and 32-bit > Linux (RHEL5) againt SQL Server 2008. > > It has turned out that Pyodbc needed the CPLUS_INCLUDE_PATH set to > where my version of UnixODBC was prefixed to prior to building. Best > bet is to remove all prior versions including distro packaged. If you > don't the Pyodbc may pickup header sources from there. By the way > their setup.py seems to have issues and can leave behind certain files > despite "clean" command. Also mind any leftovers in site-packages. > > Playing with compiler settings for the unixODBC, namely various > combinations of the CPPFLAGS="-DBUILD_LEGACY_64_BIT_MODE - > DSIZEOF_LONG_INT=8" allowed me to align the libs to the Pyodbc such > that the segfault got eliminated but in the end the flags proved > unneccesary once the above mentioned include path was properly set. > > On Sep 9, 10:54 pm, Victor Olex <[email protected]> wrote: >> Pyodbc has changes as late as this month. Misery likes company. When I >> tried to install this same stack on 64 bit architecture I am getting >> Segmentation fault errors for some queries. Easysoft has some info on >> ODBC in 64bit athttp://www.easysoft.com/developer/interfaces/odbc/64-bit.html >> There are some variables that can be set wrt to word length when >> building unixODBC. Hopefully I can find the right setup. >> >> On Sep 9, 1:47 pm, Michael Bayer <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> 2.1.9 from the github link you showed me. Just to make sure I also just >>> cloned the tip from code.google.com and tried that one too. >> >>> Has pyodbc made adjustments to changes in FreeTDS 0.91 ? >> >>> On Sep 9, 2011, at 1:15 PM, Victor Olex wrote: >> >>>> What version of pyodbc? >> >>>> On Sep 9, 11:08 am, Michael Bayer <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> On Sep 9, 2011, at 10:48 AM, Michael Bayer wrote: >> >>>>>> It also makes me less than comfortable unconditionally emitting a u'' >>>>>> for a bound parameter as it appears to cause problems. >> >>>>> I've also checked my SQL server, all databases including master are >>>>> configured at SQL Server 2008 compatibility... >> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>> "sqlalchemy" group. >>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>> [email protected]. >>>> For more options, visit this group >>>> athttp://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "sqlalchemy" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sqlalchemy" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en.
