Steve Haslam posted an ITP for this...
I know he has some packages created for 3.1.17
They don't change the /usr/lib/libdb.so,a or /usr/include/db.h links from
the db2 files though
(sensible, as anything linking to them would then link to db3 instead of db2
and that's probably not wanted right now)
With a few changes 3.2.9 can be packaged with his diff
I'd also like to know what breakage...I'm not having any problems, and I've
rebuilt sasl with 3.2.9 and built cyrus 2.0.12 with db 3.2.9 on two
From: Sam TH [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 19:25
To: Ben Collins
Subject: Re: libdb3?
What precise breakage was occuring? I ask because I currently have
3.2.9 installed in /usr/local/BerkeleyDB.3.2, and have had no problems
yet. Of course, this installation only includes libdb.a, as opposed
to the shared libraries.
Is there any way you could be persuaded to provide only libdb3-dev
packages? There's at least one application (Subversion) which I have
to have db3 for, and we all know that non-packaged software is Evil.
If you aren't willing, I'd be happy to try to work on the problem,
first to get just libdb3-dev working, and then to get the full shared
library package available.
Did Sleepycat decide to stop doing symbol versioning for db3? Or was
there a similar situtation for the transition to db2?