Re: dblibs

[Raphael Hertzog <rhertzog@hrnet.fr>]

Le Wed, Jul 07, 1999 at 08:58:03AM -0400, Kermit Tensmeyer écrivait:
>  Why must the system need (db 1.85, db 2.1.2, db 2.4.3 <and with the
> new potato db 2.6.X>)? From the list of things that broke when I
> upgraded then only software that seemed to have a real dependence
> might be the nss_db code.
> 
>  bind, exim, sendmail, xemacs all prefer the newer db libararies. In
> order to use the previous version (1.85) each product has to eliminate 
> basic functionality.
> 
>  Is there some (not so obvious) reason why this products have not been 
> rebuilt with the latest version of the libraries?

Backward compatibility. 

>   Ouch!   libdb 2.4.14 has well known deficenies. See the changes file 
> as www.sleepycat.com.  This is at least 18 months old. keeping abreast 
> of the bug-fixes and subsitent library upgrades would seem to be a
> critical priority, would it not?

I don't know if we have libdb 2.4.24 but that's the version number
menionned in /usr/include/libdb.h ...

You may ask directly to Joel Klecker the libc maintainer for more
information about which version is in libc ...

Cheers,
-- 
Hertzog Raphaël >> 0C4CABF1 >> http://prope.insa-lyon.fr/~rhertzog/