usr/include/ndbm.h duplicate in cygwin-1.3.11-2

usr/include/ndbm.h duplicate in cygwin-1.3.11-2

[Gerrit P. Haase]

Hallo cygwin,

cygwin/cygwin-1.3.11-2 The UNIX emulation engine:
Sat Jun 22 02:59:41 2002           2879 usr/include/ndbm.h

gdbm/gdbm-1.8.0-4 GNU dbm database routines (runtime version):
Wed Feb 20 03:05:51 2002           2003 usr/include/ndbm.h

Both packages contain the header ndbm.h.


Gerrit
-- 
=^..^=


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: usr/include/ndbm.h duplicate in cygwin-1.3.11-2

[Charles Wilson]

Gerrit P. Haase wrote:

> Hallo cygwin,
> 
> cygwin/cygwin-1.3.11-2 The UNIX emulation engine:
> Sat Jun 22 02:59:41 2002           2879 usr/include/ndbm.h
> 
> gdbm/gdbm-1.8.0-4 GNU dbm database routines (runtime version):
> Wed Feb 20 03:05:51 2002           2003 usr/include/ndbm.h
> 
> Both packages contain the header ndbm.h.


On June 20, db(3) was added to newlib.  Thus, newlib now ships db.h and 
ndbm.h.

db.h will conflict with the new berkeley db package symlink, and ndbm.h 
as you point out conflicts with gdbm.

However, since cygwin doesn't yet *export* the database functions, we 
can hide this problem in the short term by:
   1) cygwin package shouldn't ship db.h or ndbm.h yet
   2) leave the db() symbols out of cygwin.din

That will give us some breathing room until 1.3.12.  Ummm...chris?  I 
just saw the new announcement for 1.3.11-3 -- I think you removed ndbm.h 
but db.h is still there... :-(

--Chuck



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: usr/include/ndbm.h duplicate in cygwin-1.3.11-2

[Gerrit P. Haase]

Charles schrieb:

> Gerrit P. Haase wrote:

>> Hallo cygwin,
>> 
>> cygwin/cygwin-1.3.11-2 The UNIX emulation engine:
>> Sat Jun 22 02:59:41 2002           2879 usr/include/ndbm.h
>> 
>> gdbm/gdbm-1.8.0-4 GNU dbm database routines (runtime version):
>> Wed Feb 20 03:05:51 2002           2003 usr/include/ndbm.h
>> 
>> Both packages contain the header ndbm.h.


> On June 20, db(3) was added to newlib.  Thus, newlib now ships db.h and 
> ndbm.h.

> db.h will conflict with the new berkeley db package symlink, and ndbm.h 
> as you point out conflicts with gdbm.

> However, since cygwin doesn't yet *export* the database functions, we 
> can hide this problem in the short term by:
>    1) cygwin package shouldn't ship db.h or ndbm.h yet
>    2) leave the db() symbols out of cygwin.din

> That will give us some breathing room until 1.3.12.  Ummm...chris?  I 
> just saw the new announcement for 1.3.11-3 -- I think you removed ndbm.h 
> but db.h is still there... :-(

Ach so, db.h too, I didn't realized this.  Maybe that is the reason why
I cannot build Perl anymore with cygwin-1.3.11-2.

Gerrit
-- 
=^..^=


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: usr/include/ndbm.h duplicate in cygwin-1.3.11-2

[Nicholas Wourms]

Chuck,

It looks to me like it is db-1, not db-3...  There are /way/ too few
source files for it to be the latter.  This is, of course, highly
annoying.  Most linuxs come with the berkeley db, and now Cygwin does as
well.  It doesn't make sense for them to clobber an existing db.h, it
should be segregated in a libc-only header folder.  Either that, or like
glibc, keep db as an external dependancy.  *Sigh*, Chuck I guess I'll have
to figure out a new strategy for releasing the other Berkely DB's...  If
some kind soul who works for the crimson hat might confer with the newlib
folks regarding this situation, it would be most appreciated.  Meanwhile,
be aware that the db-2 packages will clobber cygwin-1.3.11 files and
vis-versa...

Cheers,
Nicholas
--- Charles Wilson <cwilson@ece.gatech.edu> wrote:
> Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
> 
> > Hallo cygwin,
> > 
> > cygwin/cygwin-1.3.11-2 The UNIX emulation engine:
> > Sat Jun 22 02:59:41 2002           2879 usr/include/ndbm.h
> > 
> > gdbm/gdbm-1.8.0-4 GNU dbm database routines (runtime version):
> > Wed Feb 20 03:05:51 2002           2003 usr/include/ndbm.h
> > 
> > Both packages contain the header ndbm.h.
> 
> 
> On June 20, db(3) was added to newlib.  Thus, newlib now ships db.h and 
> ndbm.h.
> 
> db.h will conflict with the new berkeley db package symlink, and ndbm.h 
> as you point out conflicts with gdbm.
> 
> However, since cygwin doesn't yet *export* the database functions, we 
> can hide this problem in the short term by:
>    1) cygwin package shouldn't ship db.h or ndbm.h yet
>    2) leave the db() symbols out of cygwin.din
> 
> That will give us some breathing room until 1.3.12.  Ummm...chris?  I 
> just saw the new announcement for 1.3.11-3 -- I think you removed ndbm.h
> 
> but db.h is still there... :-(


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: usr/include/ndbm.h duplicate in cygwin-1.3.11-2

[Charles Wilson]

Nicholas Wourms wrote:

> It looks to me like it is db-1, not db-3...  There are /way/ too few
> source files for it to be the latter.  This is, of course, highly
> annoying.  Most linuxs come with the berkeley db, and now Cygwin does as
> well. 


Not really.  The routines are there, and the header file -- but since 
the cygwin DLL doesn't export the routines, they effectively do not 
exist.  Which means there's no need for cygwin to ship the headers at all.

> It doesn't make sense for them to clobber an existing db.h, it
> should be segregated in a libc-only header folder.


Probably, and then distribution managers can symlink or copy as 
necessary; perhaps the newlib folks would agree to something like this. 
  However, we (cygwin) have a distributed set of distribution managers 
-- so we, collectively, have to decide which db.h gets put into 
/usr/include -- the one from newlib/cygwin (which seems rather pointless 
unless the DLL begins exporting the necessary symbols) or the symlink 
magic from your family of berkeley db packages.

>  Either that, or like
> glibc, keep db as an external dependancy. 


I doubt they will revert to that -- it is valuable on embedded systems 
to have database routines, like the POSIX(?) db(3) family, in the 
runtime.  And since newlib is primarily targetted at embedded systems...

> *Sigh*, Chuck I guess I'll have
> to figure out a new strategy for releasing the other Berkely DB's... 


Don't panic.  Let's see what cgf has to say about the issue, esp. with 
regards to cygwin exporting/not-exporting the db symbols in the future.

> If
> some kind soul who works for the crimson hat might confer with the newlib
> folks regarding this situation, it would be most appreciated.  Meanwhile,
> be aware that the db-2 packages will clobber cygwin-1.3.11 files and
> vis-versa...


Hopefully Chris will release 1.3.11-4 *without* /usr/include/db.h as a 
short-term, interim fix.

You know, we *really* need a package linter that checks for file 
conflicts -- of course, it wouldn't have caught the db.h problem, since 
db.h is created by a symlink during postinstall in your berkeley db 
packages...

--Chuck


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: usr/include/ndbm.h duplicate in cygwin-1.3.11-2

[Charles Wilson]

Charles Wilson wrote:


> 
> On June 20, db(3) was added to newlib.  Thus, newlib now ships db.h and 
> ndbm.h.


Interestingly enough, it appears that there was NO discussion of this in 
the newlib mailing list.  It just appeared and got patched into CVS with 
no discussion or warning.  (Perhaps the newlib folks talked about it 
privately or in IRC, but still...not good.)

--Chuck



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: usr/include/ndbm.h duplicate in cygwin-1.3.11-2

[Christopher Faylor]

On Mon, Jun 24, 2002 at 10:15:55AM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
>Don't panic.  Let's see what cgf has to say about the issue, esp. with 
>regards to cygwin exporting/not-exporting the db symbols in the future.

Read the newlib mailing list.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: usr/include/ndbm.h duplicate in cygwin-1.3.11-2

[Charles Wilson]

Christopher Faylor wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 24, 2002 at 10:15:55AM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
> 
>>Don't panic.  Let's see what cgf has to say about the issue, esp. with 
>>regards to cygwin exporting/not-exporting the db symbols in the future.
>>
> 
> Read the newlib mailing list.


I did.  Other than your two messages yesterday, I can't find any 
discussion of this issue at all.  It appears that the search/ directory 
and all of its contents and the two problematic header files (a) sprang 
fully formed from the head of  'fitzsim at sources dot redhat dot com' 
(Tom Fitzsimmons), (b) were applied directly to CVS without any discussion.

 From your second message on that list:

> Ok.  I can see that it is a recent addition and that there appears to be
> an object file in newlib to support it.  I wonder if this should be
> system specific, though.  Cygwin can't be the only newlib-using "OS"
> which already has a ndbm implementation, can it?


It appears that you think the db/ndbm header files from newlib *should* 
be sequestered, and are trying to start the debate on that list -- a 
debate which should have occurred PRIOR to 6/20's checkin, IMO.

The subtle hint: this discussion belongs on the newlib list.  Got it.

--Chuck


 





--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: usr/include/ndbm.h duplicate in cygwin-1.3.11-2

[Nicholas Wourms]

--- Charles Wilson <cwilson@ece.gatech.edu> wrote:
> Christopher Faylor wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Jun 24, 2002 at 10:15:55AM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
> > 
> >>Don't panic.  Let's see what cgf has to say about the issue, esp. with
> 
> >>regards to cygwin exporting/not-exporting the db symbols in the
> future.
> >>
> > 
> > Read the newlib mailing list.
> 
> The subtle hint: this discussion belongs on the newlib list.  Got it.

Chuck,

I believe that you and Chris have the best interests of this project in
mind, so I'll opt out on joining yet another mailing list :-).  However,
I'll make a concerted effort to add the newlib list as part of my daily
reading material...

Cheers,
Nicholas

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: usr/include/ndbm.h duplicate in cygwin-1.3.11-2

[Charles Wilson]

>> Read the newlib mailing list.


Chris -- thanks for running point on this issue.  It looks like the 
db.h/ndbm.h problem in newlib will be solved soon if not already.

For anyone who's interested in how this will be fixed, see yesterday's 
thread:
   http://sources.redhat.com/ml/newlib/2002/

--Chuck


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: usr/include/ndbm.h duplicate in cygwin-1.3.11-2

[Nicholas Wourms]

Yes,

Thank you *very* much Chris, you're the greatest!

Cheers,
Nicholas
--- Charles Wilson <cwilson@ece.gatech.edu> wrote:
> 
> >> Read the newlib mailing list.
> 
> 
> Chris -- thanks for running point on this issue.  It looks like the 
> db.h/ndbm.h problem in newlib will be solved soon if not already.
> 
> For anyone who's interested in how this will be fixed, see yesterday's 
> thread:
>    http://sources.redhat.com/ml/newlib/2002/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/