On Sun, 2006-04-02 at 21:56 -0600, Archaic wrote: > On Sun, Apr 02, 2006 at 10:38:22PM -0500, Randy McMurchy wrote: > > > > DB-4.4.x is in LFS, I don't have any control over that. We *must* > > assume that it will be installed as package installation instructions > > are created for BLFS. What good would it do to try something that we > > cannot use? > > So if apache for some reason just couldn't work with db-4.4.x how would > LFS's version choice keep BLFS from offering alternate versions?
Dunno, perhaps we need to jointly (with LFS folks) discuss this. > Regardless, you missed my point in asking the question. It was not to > see if we could or should revert db, but to see if 4.4 was the trigger. I don't have DB-4.3 installed anywhere any more. It is however, on Anduin. Jeremy H installed Subversion 1.3.0 on Anduin, but I don't know if he runs tests or keeps logs. I will build and run tests on Anduin and get back to this list on this. You are right, though, it would be a good test to see if the test fails on Anduin. -- Randy rmlinux: [bogomips 3993.32] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.2] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.6] [Linux 2.6.14.3 i686] 23:06:15 up 13 days, 5:40, 5 users, load average: 0.12, 0.06, 0.06 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
