On Mon, Dec 20, 2004 at 04:20:30PM +0100, Krzysztof Krzyzaniak wrote:
> > The changelog for 1.x doesn't actually mention something breaking,
> > so my guess is that the new DBD::SQLite is backwards compatible
> > and that
> it is not.
Just out of curiosity: how can a DBD not be backwards compatible? I
understand that the underlying engine might not be backwards
compatible. Do you perhaps mean that there are SQL statements that
SQLite 2 executed that SQLite 3 doesn't?
> > there's a libdbd-sqlite3-perl stuck in incoming's queue.
> No. There are prepared lidbd-sqlite2-perl packages but I have one
> problem. Generated .so file is not linked with any of sqlite package.
> I don't understand exactly how works xs packages of perl but I
> prepared this package with manually linked libsqlite0.
What do you mean "manually linked"?
It comes out fine here.
> When I fix problem with legacy package libdbd-sqlite2-perl package I'll
> upload libdbd-sqlite-perl compiled against sqlite3 libs.
Fine, but that doesn't really address the problem of existing programs
breaking, does it? What happens when both libdbd-sqlite2-perl and
libdbd-sqlite-perl are installed and one of these programs gets run?