Re: Radical idea, test backwards compatibility instead of recompile
On Mon, Oct 09, 2000 at 01:49:05AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Ben Collins <bcollins@debian.org> writes:
>
> > You people are missing one important bit of information. libc.so.6 is
> > perfectly backward compatible. That library never broke anything. It was
> > the db libraries. It does not matter if you start recompiling against the
> > new glibc, because you can no longer link against it's version of libdb.
>
> But as I understand it, we have a bug still, because we (Debian) have
> discontinued support for something (like the old db format, and the
> old db library interface), and users might well want those things to
> continue to work on woody.
>
> Can we please make it possible for them to continue to work? What
> exactly are the obstacles there?
I wasn't going to dignify this with an answer, but just to stop the FUD:
THIS HAS BEEN FIXED!
Things compiled with the now obsolete, GLibc db interface, will continue
to work, but you can no longer COMPILE against this interface. Which means
you have to install one of the libdb[0-9]-dev packages and use its
interface, which is SOURCE compatible with Glibc's since, well, GLIBC
DIDN'T INVENT THE INTERFACE! They derived it from the current Berkeley DB
libraries (and added versioning and their own soname's).
Ben
--
-----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------
/ Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \
` bcollins@debian.org -- bcollins@openldap.org -- bcollins@linux.com '
`---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'
Reply to: