On Fri, Feb 06, 2004 at 05:41:18PM -0500, Kris Deugau wrote: > However, I've just discovered that there's also a bad version mismatch > between the "default" libdb version used by DB_File in RedHat, and the one in > Debian (db3 in RedHat vs db1 [I think] in Debian). I also discovered that > this has been included as a part of the monolithic perl-5.6.1 package, and I > *really* don't want to go anywhere near backporting that myself or using a > third-party backport. > > I discovered this in trying to get the SA2.63 install (from backports.org) to > recognize the ~40M global Bayes dbs and per-user AWL files; instead I > discover pairs of .dir + .pag files for AWL (which I vaguely recall are an > artifact of db1) and SA won't open the existing bayes_* files.
sounds like you've run into a reason to upgrade to unstable. you have three choices: 1. backport perl 5.8.x and libdb4 and all associated modules and other packages. 2. try to find a backports archive where someone else has done the same. 3. point sources.list at unstable and either 'apt-get install' perl and other packages, or 'apt-get dist-upgrade'. choice 1 is a lot of work. choice 2 doesn't really offer any benefits over just upgrading to 'unstable', or upgrading certain packages to their 'unstable' versions. choice 3 will result in the least problems, and will be better tested - there are far more people using unstable than there are using backports of perl. > Is there something like cpan2rpm or cpanflute for Debian? I'd like to > pull in current versions of Perl modules dh-make-perl can fetch a package from CPAN and produce a working package that is good enough for local use (but not "polished" enough to upload to debian for re-distribution). > (or even just recompile the > stable version against different libs). this is always an option. it's called 'back-porting'. download the debianised source from unstable (along with any build dependancies) and build it. > I *could* hack together some bits to force db3 to work by building on > RedHat, and using alien to install... but that's just plain ugly and as > I've already discovered it *will* break because of differences in how > RedHat and Debian handle the core Perl install and addon modules. really, upgrading to 'unstable' will be the least-hassle option. 'unstable' means that the entire system is in flux, that it changes constantly. it does not mean that the packages in it are unreliable. craig ps: i've been running ALL of my production servers on 'unstable' since 1995. i upgrade them semi-regularly. no major problems. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
