Re: Excess copies of libdb

2004-03-31 Thread Clint Adams
> [2] I don't know about interoperability between db4.0 and db4.2 created > databases, if that's bidirectionally compatible, this doesn't matter > much Apps using db4.2 will be able to read databases created by apps using db4.0, but not the other way around.

Re: Excess copies of libdb

2004-03-31 Thread Clint Adams
> Do db4.0->db4.2 upgrades work that way often? :-) If so, perl might be > easier to upgrade to db4.2... The simpler the use of BDB, the more painless the upgrade. A quick glance at DB_File reveals that it's only providing an interface to Hash, BTree, and Recno database types. Since it's not us

Re: Excess copies of libdb

2004-03-31 Thread Russ Allbery
Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Package: inn2-ssl >> Package: inn2 >> Package: inn2-inews > As is this... Speaking as upstream for INN, the intent of the ovdb overview method in INN is that it should be able to automatically upgrade the database even if the database format has cha

Re: Excess copies of libdb

2004-03-31 Thread Adrian Bunk
On Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 10:20:28PM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > On Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 03:05:21PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > > Perl (last db4.0 "Standard" package) would most likely be a lot harder, > > since it *does* expose the db interface, so it probably shouldn't be > > altered

Re: Excess copies of libdb

2004-03-31 Thread Jeroen van Wolffelaar
On Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 03:05:21PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > Perl (last db4.0 "Standard" package) would most likely be a lot harder, > since it *does* expose the db interface, so it probably shouldn't be > altered until after sarge releases. woody's perl has db2[1], so whether sarge's perl

Re: Excess copies of libdb

2004-03-31 Thread Nathanael Nerode
Clint Adams wrote: >> Note that upgrading applications to new libdb versions is generally more >> work than you expect, as on-disk databases need to be upgraded. >> Sometimes you can use the db*_upgrade tools, sometimes you can dump and >> reload, sometimes it's acceptable and much easier to trash

Re: Excess copies of libdb

2004-03-31 Thread Nathanael Nerode
Colin Watson wrote: > On Mon, Mar 29, 2004 at 12:53:14AM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote: >> OK, just as a data point, here are the things on my system built against >> various versions of libdb other than libdb4.2. >> --> libdb1-compat >> libc6 >> >> Is there ever going to be any way to get rid of

Re: Excess copies of libdb

2004-03-31 Thread Nathanael Nerode
Rene Engelhard wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hi, > > Nathanael Nerode wrote: >> --> libdb3: >> rpm (and librpm4) >> libsasl2 >> dhelp >> libpam-modules >> openoffice.org-bin > > OOo builds and (apparently) works with db3, db4.0, 4.1 and > (I tested this yesterday)

Re: Excess copies of libdb

2004-03-30 Thread Clint Adams
> Note that upgrading applications to new libdb versions is generally more > work than you expect, as on-disk databases need to be upgraded. > Sometimes you can use the db*_upgrade tools, sometimes you can dump and > reload, sometimes it's acceptable and much easier to trash the database > and rebu

Re: Excess copies of libdb

2004-03-30 Thread Clint Adams
> This give me a question (just curious). Is there any specific reason we > didn't have packages 3.3.11? I can't answer that.

Re: Excess copies of libdb

2004-03-29 Thread Steve Langasek
On Tue, Mar 30, 2004 at 04:43:45AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote: > $ grep-available -FDepends -sPackage libdb4.1 | wc -l > 65 > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ grep-available -FDepends -sPackage libdb4.1 > Package: libapache-mod-auth-mysql > Package: vacation > Package: libapache-mod-security > Package: libap

Re: Excess copies of libdb

2004-03-29 Thread Colin Watson
On Mon, Mar 29, 2004 at 12:53:14AM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > OK, just as a data point, here are the things on my system built against > various versions of libdb other than libdb4.2. > --> libdb1-compat > libc6 > > Is there ever going to be any way to get rid of this waste of space? > :-(

Re: Excess copies of libdb

2004-03-29 Thread Rene Engelhard
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Clint Adams wrote: > > Hopefully this should be easy to switch to either libdb3 or libdb4.2. The > > People should be encouraged to move things away from db3, not to it. > Debian's db3 is 3.2.9, which is arguably buggier than 3.3.11, which was > the f

Re: Excess copies of libdb

2004-03-29 Thread Rene Engelhard
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > --> libdb3: > rpm (and librpm4) > libsasl2 > dhelp > libpam-modules > openoffice.org-bin OOo builds and (apparently) works with db3, db4.0, 4.1 and (I tested this yesterday) 4.2, too - the db stuff is afais just used for

Re: Excess copies of libdb

2004-03-29 Thread Clint Adams
> Hopefully this should be easy to switch to either libdb3 or libdb4.2. The People should be encouraged to move things away from db3, not to it. Debian's db3 is 3.2.9, which is arguably buggier than 3.3.11, which was the final release of db3, back in 2001. I think it's about time to get current.

Re: Excess copies of libdb

2004-03-29 Thread Steve Langasek
On Mon, Mar 29, 2004 at 12:53:14AM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > >> db3 > >> #223142, #234507 > >> db4.0 > >> #223140 > >> I know we can't remove them. One of the base problems > > It would be nice to see fewer copies of libdb in sarge, in all honesty. > > Christian Perrier reported on debian-