(Illustration by Gaich Muramatsu)
>>>>> "Jan" == Jan Harkes <jaharkes_at_cs.cmu.edu> writes: Jan> Well it became virtually impossible to maintain code based on Jan> libdb 1.85. Yeah, we've been there before, that's how I guessed. Thanks to Ivan who told me what I really needed to know: I have to reinstall the old version of pdbtool. And thanks to Jan for maintaining the debian/rules, because of course I can do that with just dpkg -i ...! Jan> The current sleepycat libdb is really overkill Somewhat OT, but you (and others) might find this useful: It's worse than that. Because of their targeting of the embedded market, where many vendors use proprietary, non-ISO-conformant compilers, they have huge amounts of cruft in the headers. They do stuff like #undef const conditional on #ifdef __STDC__, which is a non-conforming coding practice (conforming compilers are required to #define __STDC__ 1, but some "ISO-wannabe" compilers do not #define __STDC__ at all). There were incompatible interface changes between 4.0 and 4.1, and so on. :-( Unless you need Berkeley DB, it's just not worth supporting it. (Not running down Sleepycat, by the way--- they were very helpful. It's just that users have to recognize that their priorities are not tuned to stability for OSS projects that just want Coda wants: a simple, rock-solid, lookup.) Jan> and I've noticed that many/most opensource projects have Jan> started to implement their own 'simple' databases. Samba has Jan> tdb, enlightenment uses edb to make up for the loss of Jan> libdb1.85. I wonder why somebody doesn't just take up maintenance of libdb1.85. -- Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN Ask not how you can "do" free software business; ask what your business can "do for" free software.Received on 2003-04-01 21:30:50