RE: first (production) bug 10.1 on win32?

From: Niall Litchfield <n-litchfield_at_audit-commission.gov.uk>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 13:41:26 +0000
Message-Id: <s0603ea3.077@bristol21.bristol.ac>

Comment in-line

> -----Original Message-----
> From: jreyes_at_dazasoftware.com
> Sent: 23 March 2004 12:26
> To: jreyes_at_dazasoftware.com; oracle-l_at_freelists.org
> Subject: Re: first (production) bug 10.1 on win32?
>
>
> I don't want to be unrespectful,
> neither get you hate me,
> and is true there are problems and bugs in the installation,
>
> But I saw, obviously not in the 10g installation,
> some dbas didn't read the documentation
> before installing the software
> .)

There is no way to control the service name for the isqlplus service that is documented or accessible from the install. In addition having a default value that is not legal would definitely count as a bug in my book.

The service name seems to be legal on XP, but not on win2k as far as the responses on this thread suggest.

Now if anyone can suggest a reason to use isqlplus in the first place.... Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
Audit Commission
+44 117 975 7805

This email contains information intended for the addressee only. It may be confidential and may be the subject of legal and/or
professional privilege. Any dissemination, distribution, copyright or use of this
communication without prior permission of the sender is strictly prohibited.

Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com

To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request_at_freelists.org put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.

--
Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Received on Tue Mar 23 2004 - 07:38:54 CST