On 22.7.2014 17:16, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On 22 July 2014 09:05, Florian Weimer wrote:
On 07/22/2014 04:08 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
The current plan is to not ship v6 in F21, and there are no agreed plans
to ship it in any future release either. See https://fedorahosted.org/
fesco/ti
On 22 July 2014 09:05, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 07/22/2014 04:08 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
>
>> The current plan is to not ship v6 in F21, and there are no agreed plans
>> to ship it in any future release either. See https://fedorahosted.org/
>> fesco/ticket/1291 for the full history of the de
On 07/22/2014 04:08 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
The current plan is to not ship v6 in F21, and there are no agreed plans to
ship it in any future release either. See
https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1291 for the full history of the debate.
Yet Oracle advertises Fedora's use of Berkeley DB
- Original Message -
> On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 03:19:42PM +0200, Jan Staněk wrote:
> > One of the planned parts of the F21 System Wide Change: BerkeleyDB 6 [1]
> > is the introduction of downstream symbol versioning of both versions of
> > the libraries (libdb with v6 and libdb5 with v5). T
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 03:19:42PM +0200, Jan Staněk wrote:
> One of the planned parts of the F21 System Wide Change: BerkeleyDB 6 [1]
> is the introduction of downstream symbol versioning of both versions of
> the libraries (libdb with v6 and libdb5 with v5). This part is planned
> in order to not
Once upon a time, Honza Horak said:
> We should provide some libdb officially supported by upstream, which
> won't be the case for libdb-5 forever.
Is there a list yet of the packages using libdb-5 that have a license
issue with libdb-6? If there are many, there may be community interest
in fork
On 05/07/2014 10:21 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Adam Jackson said:
I don't know if I have a good suggestion here, none of the alternatives
sound appealing.
Is there a compelling reason to upgrade to BDB-6 (other than 6 > 5)?
The license change really seems to be a PITA, since it
On 07/05/14 15:39, Joe Orton wrote:
> On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 03:19:42PM +0200, Jan Staněk wrote:
>> One of the planned parts of the F21 System Wide Change: BerkeleyDB 6 [1]
>> is the introduction of downstream symbol versioning of both versions of
>> the libraries (libdb with v6 and libdb5 with v5
Once upon a time, Adam Jackson said:
> I don't know if I have a good suggestion here, none of the alternatives
> sound appealing.
Is there a compelling reason to upgrade to BDB-6 (other than 6 > 5)?
The license change really seems to be a PITA, since it is incompatible
with the licenses of softwa
On Wed, 2014-05-07 at 15:19 +0200, Jan Staněk wrote:
> One of the planned parts of the F21 System Wide Change: BerkeleyDB 6 [1]
> is the introduction of downstream symbol versioning of both versions of
> the libraries (libdb with v6 and libdb5 with v5). This part is planned
> in order to not introd
Hello,
2014-05-07 15:19 GMT+02:00 Jan Staněk :
> In short, if we introduce the downstream versioning, we will ship
> library with ABI incompatible with upstream ABI. If we won't,
> applications with modules/plugins (ie. Apache with mod_perl) that each
> use different version of the library may bre
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 03:19:42PM +0200, Jan Staněk wrote:
> One of the planned parts of the F21 System Wide Change: BerkeleyDB 6 [1]
> is the introduction of downstream symbol versioning of both versions of
> the libraries (libdb with v6 and libdb5 with v5). This part is planned
> in order to not
On 05/07/2014 03:19 PM, Jan Staněk wrote:
One of the planned parts of the F21 System Wide Change: BerkeleyDB 6 [1]
is the introduction of downstream symbol versioning of both versions of
the libraries (libdb with v6 and libdb5 with v5). This part is planned
in order to not introduce bugs similar
One of the planned parts of the F21 System Wide Change: BerkeleyDB 6 [1]
is the introduction of downstream symbol versioning of both versions of
the libraries (libdb with v6 and libdb5 with v5). This part is planned
in order to not introduce bugs similar to [2]. However, if we introduce
downstream
14 matches
Mail list logo