GH-46004: [C++][FlightRPC] Enable ODBC Build In C++ and GLib Workflows #47689
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Enable ODBC build in Windows MSVC workflow
github-actions
bot
added
Component: C++
Component: FlightRPC
awaiting review
alinaliBQ
commented
Oct 2, 2025
Comment on lines
22
to
+23
| #include <arrow/flight/types.h> | ||
| #include <boost/variant.hpp> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
boost::variant is an existing dependency of flightsql-odbc. Our plan is to replace it with std::variant in future PRs
github-actions
bot
added
awaiting committer review
kou
changed the title
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Rationale for this change
Enable ODBC Build In C++ and Glib Workflows to make sure ODBC can build in CI.
What changes are included in this PR?
ARROW_FLIGHT_SQL_ODBC:ONrecognized in C++ build.Are these changes tested?
Tested in CI
Are there any user-facing changes?
No
Extracted from PR #46099