Re: [RFC] OpenLDAP automatic upgrade
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005, Clint Adams wrote:
> some version of db4.3 on some platform because of some undescribed flaw
> related to the log format change. There does not appear to be a report
> in the Debian BTS about this problem.
Hmm... my experience with BDB 4.x tells me we should be quite a bit paranoid
with it, it is a wonderful piece of software, but it takes a while to shake
out all the bugs, and so far that "while" was more time than what it took
for upstream to change to the next version.
Only now I would trust BDB 4.2 with any mission critical data... but then, I
am the one which still builds Cyrus 2.1 against BDB 3.2 for stability (Cyrus
2.2 will be built against BDB 4.2).
On a tangent, why do we still have BDB 4.1 on Debian? Isn't it "not
exactly safe" on SMP and SMT machines? Or were all bugs fixed in 4.2 also
fixed there?
> Now, as far as pestering other maintainers goes, I don't believe there's
> a point there either. Most of the packages currently built against
Not yet, that's for sure.
> libdb4.3 don't use transactional environments, and thus cannot be bitten
> by the txn log problem mentioned by Quanah Gibson-Mount.
Agreed.
> If there are any real problems with software built with Debian's db4.3
> packages (which are built quite differently than Fedora's, for example),
> they should be reported so they can be fixed.
I also agree with you in this. I will take that as a "prove to me that
there is a bug, and we go from there" reply.
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh
Reply to: