Scott,

thanks for your feedback. And it's reported that SS does NOT do this, I am
using CS, I'll explain in a bit.... As much as I agree with you, here in lies
the problem.

My client has a FreeBSD File server, and OpenBSD Firewall.

A company that supplies them with software has a new package. They outright
refuse to use anything else bar the following software:

Firebird CS 1.0.0.796-0 Linux binaries on either redhat or Mandrake, no other
Linux.

Now, if they do not run on those Operating Systems alone, they will not
support the client. But after talking to them they now agree to support the
client on everything bar the operating system and database server itself; but
they will support their software that uses the database, and the database
files themselves. They won't do this using any other version of firebird
though! AND I have not been able to find a native binary (perhaps source is
available?) for Firebird CS 1.0.0.796-0 on FreeBSD.

It is not an option to just put in another box and put linux on it. I hope you
understand that for 6-8 work station PCs, 2 servers is plenty, 3 is really
overdoing it, and wasting resources, when you already have a powerful file
server.

Of course the client does not wish to invest their money in converting the box
to Linux and lose all the work put into making a secure, extremely reliable,
high performance FreeBSD file server, and I can understand why. I am a big
fan of FreeBSD, and prefer it over linux, but I don't want to start that
argument.

My only thought is to try the native FreeBSD firebird 1.0.2.0-whatever, but
then the software company seem to be refusing to support what becomes the the
important part of using their package, ie the data and queries their software
performs. Sounds a bit silly to me, and I am yet to convince them around
this.

So I am in a bit of a bind. It's not a technical issue that I am running Linux
Binaries on BSD, it's all about politics of "support", that is extremely
important to my client who is considering spending alot of money to implement
the software in question. With no support from this software company for the
client, I'm the one who will end up getting all the calls for software I
don't even use, let alone write or support. And by the way, FreeBSD's Linux
support isn't bad. Of course native is better, but it does do very well, and
it's what I've got to work with on this, due to the position I have been put
in.

-Geoff

On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 01:47 pm, Scott Taylor wrote:
> At 10:24 07/25/03, you wrote:
> >Hi there,
> >
> >The problem may not exist on that version (1.0.2.908-1). My issue may be
> >specific to 1.0.0.796-0, but I'm not sure. It is running Linux binaries
> > using the Linux_base that comes with FreeBSD; and with the software I
> > need to run "apparently" they require you use that specific version of
> > Firebird.
> >
> >If there is a FreeBSD binary (or source I could compile) version of
> >1.0.0.796-0 I could try that out maybe? I'm not sure if the same thing
> > occurs on Linux using the Linux Binaries or not, as I am yet to try it.
> > What I can say is the same version compiled for win32 does NOT have the
> > issue.
>
> I don't have that problem running 1.0.2 SS on Linux either. I don't think
> it is such a good idea to run it non-native on FreeBSD or any OS for that
> matter. I've seen many strange things using other OS libs to run
> things. Emulators and non-native libs are great fun for desktop stuff but
> not for server end apps.
>
> Build a simple Linux boxen with 2.4 kernel and 1.0.[23] versions of SS
> work great. I doubt they are less than backwards compatible with 1.0.0.
> Could it really hurt to try? I'd bet it just works, and easy for FreeBSD
> to telnet, SSH, rlogin to Linux boxen and still have the same look and
> feel.
>
> Scott.
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
>
>
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> firebird-support-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.