[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: libdb4.* madness in unstable

On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 09:37:21AM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> If you want to help reducing this number, a good point would helping
> getting more documentation about the different versions (and their
> differences) available, and (at least for me) make some backports of the
> suggested version people should use in your opinion available for etch
> (via backports or whatever). At last I don't have the heart to change
> to another version without giving it some more robust try
> privately (as libdb has not the nicest history of ugly quirks and
> shortcomings in the different versions) before that. And robust try
> means real work test means within a (at least mostly) stable environment.

A deep analysis of release notes, discussions with upstream and accurate
analysis of APIs are mandatory in this case. I think it is simply
unbelievable that the library is not backward compatible at every new
release. Issues with specific versions should be managed
and solved: having a new source for every release is simply not
acceptable. BTW, this is not the only case of such a mess around for
libraries (maybe some upstreams should be spanked...).

Francesco P. Lovergine

Reply to: