reassign 354723 unixodbc thanks On 2 March 2006 at 14:22, Steve Langasek wrote: | On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 11:10:56PM +0100, Johannes Ranke wrote: | > > | So with RODBC the only variable here, I'm still pretty sure it's an RODBC | > > | bug. | | > I just built r-cran-rodbc 1.1.3 on my unstable box - the problem is | > back! If I reinstall the version from stable, it goes away again (and so | > on:) | | Hah, ok, you beat me to it. :) | | Alright, I'll try to take a look at what could be different between unixodbc | 2.2.4 and unixodbc 2.2.11 that would be triggering this. I have an amd64 | system I can test on, so hopefully the problem will be reproducible.
That sounds more like it. The upstream author/maintainer of RODBC is pretty experienced in matters relating to 64bit having had access to 64bit Solaris "forever". I don't think that it is a simple cast or something like that tripping up RODBC. And as I said, it's code has changed little, and RODBC is being used quite a bit. Now, that doesn't mean it must be unixodbc, but I would simply assign a higher probability to that case. Hence I'm reassigning as predicted by Steve :) Dirk -- Hell, there are no rules here - we're trying to accomplish something. -- Thomas A. Edison -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]