On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 06:06:10PM +0100, Matthias Andree wrote:
Am 20.12.2012 16:20, schrieb Michael Elkins:1.1 --- a/configure.ac Thu Jul 22 20:06:33 2010 +0200 1.2 +++ b/configure.ac Wed Dec 19 14:40:24 2012 -0800 1.3 @@ -993,7 +993,7 @@ 1.4 bdbpfx="$bdbpfx $d/$v" 1.5 done 1.6 done 1.7 - BDB_VERSIONS="db-4 db4 db-4.6 db4.6 db46 db-4.5 db4.5 db45 db-4.4 db4.4 db44 db-4.3 db4.3 db43 db-4.2 db4.2 db42 db-4.1 db4.1 db41 db ''" 1.8 + BDB_VERSIONS="db-4 db4 db-5 db5 db-5.2 db5.2 db52 db-5.1 db5.1 db51 db-5.0 db5.0 db50 db-4.8 db4.8 db48 db-4.7 db4.7 db47 db-4.6 db4.6 db46 db-4.5 db4.5 db45 db-4.4 db4.4 db44 db-4.3 db4.3 db43 db-4.2 db4.2 db42 db-4.1 db4.1 db41 db ''" 1.9 AC_MSG_CHECKING([for BerkeleyDB > 4.0]) 1.10 for d in $bdbpfx; do 1.11 BDB_INCLUDE_DIR=""Whoever did this, this is way excessive, even in the light of rampant renaming of libdb, and it Does Not Even Workâ˘. You end up with 456 (literally!) gcc -o conftest ... runs but none comes up with a db. I have perfectly working DB 4.1, 4.8 and 5.3 installed, and you should think it would have picked one up at least. But no.
Suggestions for cleaning that up are welcome. As I understand it, the main problem here is FreeBSD which supports the installation of multiple development versions. Of the Linux-based OS's that I've tested, you can typically expect that /usr/include/db.h and -ldb are a newish BDB. But on FreeBSD, that will get you a much older version. So much work is done to hunt for a newer version...
