Subject | Re: [Firebird-general] Embedded Engine |
---|---|
Author | Lester Caine |
Post date | 2004-06-18T13:52:13Z |
Nando Dessena wrote:
All my applications run as a number of modules, firebird is just one of
those modules. What comes out of the database determines what else needs
to run. Firebird is just one of the packages that get's installed on the
windows machines and all runs fine. So what is there to fix ;)
If a second machine wants to access the data, it just connects.
p.s. Paul - in a windows world I have no means of compiling firebird so
I can't build a special. So are all combinations going to have to be
provided as binaries. Removing the limitations on the build process
would be nice, but again - it works now - so why 'fix it' :)
--
Lester Caine
-----------------------------
L.S.Caine Electronic Services
> L> I find that where I use Firebird on a single machine, it's nice to beI'm afraid I still don't get it :)
> L> able to log in and fix things remotely
>
> I think so too, that's why I asked for an embeddable *server* (as
> opposed to the current fbembed, which is just an embeddable *engine*).
> Unfortunately noone is willing to implement it, as it appears, at
> least until Vulcan is finished.
All my applications run as a number of modules, firebird is just one of
those modules. What comes out of the database determines what else needs
to run. Firebird is just one of the packages that get's installed on the
windows machines and all runs fine. So what is there to fix ;)
If a second machine wants to access the data, it just connects.
p.s. Paul - in a windows world I have no means of compiling firebird so
I can't build a special. So are all combinations going to have to be
provided as binaries. Removing the limitations on the build process
would be nice, but again - it works now - so why 'fix it' :)
--
Lester Caine
-----------------------------
L.S.Caine Electronic Services