DB 2.7.x is not binary compatible with DB 2.4.x

DB 2.7.x is not binary compatible with DB 2.4.x

[Mark Kettenis]

I've verified that DB 2.7.5 (the version on the main branch) is not
binary compatible with DB 2.4.14 (the version included with 2.1.x).
Sendmail cannot create the aliases database (/etc/aliases.db)
anymore.  If you compare db.h between those versions (using the CVS
web browser on sourceware) you'll see that a lot of flags have been
renumbered.  In particular the DB_TRUNCATE flag, which is causing my
sendmail troubles.

This means that we should either bump the libdb soname, or use
versioning to create functions that map the old flags onto the new
ones.  I think the latter involves quite some work, and is not
guaranteed to result in total binary compatibility.  So personally, I'm
in favour of bumping the soname.

Mark

Re: DB 2.7.x is not binary compatible with DB 2.4.x

[Ulrich Drepper]

Mark Kettenis <kettenis@wins.uva.nl> writes:

> This means that we should either bump the libdb soname, or use
> versioning to create functions that map the old flags onto the new
> ones.

None of this.  First, you are really stupid installing this libc
version.  The warning in configure isn't there for fun.  It's not only
about the locale suff, other changes (including the db stuff) is
included.

Second, db/db2 will be removed from glibc soon.  Then you can do
whatever you want.  I for myself will probably stay with 2.4.

-- 
---------------.      drepper at gnu.org  ,-.   1325 Chesapeake Terrace
Ulrich Drepper  \    ,-------------------'   \  Sunnyvale, CA 94089 USA
Cygnus Solutions `--' drepper at cygnus.com   `------------------------

Re: DB 2.7.x is not binary compatible with DB 2.4.x

[Mark Kettenis]

   From: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@cygnus.com>
   Date: 21 Jul 1999 05:31:23 -0700

   Mark Kettenis <kettenis@wins.uva.nl> writes:

   > This means that we should either bump the libdb soname, or use
   > versioning to create functions that map the old flags onto the new
   > ones.

   None of this.  First, you are really stupid installing this libc
   version.  The warning in configure isn't there for fun.  It's not only
   about the locale suff, other changes (including the db stuff) is
   included.

Sorry, but I want to make sure that the development version keeps
working on the Hurd.  If I don't do this regularly it becomes very
hard to track down problems when things break.  The easiest way to
make sure that the core servers keep working is actually installing
libc.  Of course this isn't a "production" system and of course I have
made a backup first.  Please understand that I'm not whining that
things are broken.  I just wanted to make sure that you're aware of
the problems with DB.

   Second, db/db2 will be removed from glibc soon.  Then you can do
   whatever you want.  I for myself will probably stay with 2.4.

Just curious, but what's the reason for dropping db/db2?

Mark

Re: DB 2.7.x is not binary compatible with DB 2.4.x

[Ulrich Drepper]

Mark Kettenis <kettenis@wins.uva.nl> writes:

> Just curious, but what's the reason for dropping db/db2?

You have to ask after making a remark about the problems?  I have no
control over the sources and have to live with the consequences.  And
everybody comes whining to me about te problems they have with db.
It's not necessary.

-- 
---------------.      drepper at gnu.org  ,-.   1325 Chesapeake Terrace
Ulrich Drepper  \    ,-------------------'   \  Sunnyvale, CA 94089 USA
Cygnus Solutions `--' drepper at cygnus.com   `------------------------