On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Luke Dashjr <l...@dashjr.org> wrote: > On Wednesday, June 25, 2014 6:53:57 PM Scott Howard wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 2:50 PM, Scott Howard <showard...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Thank you, Chris. I think you articulated the situation well and the >> > options. >> >> one more thing: debian is discussion dropping libdb (the db the node, >> but not the wallet, uses). That might force our hand as well: either >> ship and support upstream's included libdb or drop the node and just >> ship the wallet. libdb long-term security maintenance might be >> challenging. > > You mean LevelDB? Debian should use the embedded copy regardless, due to the > consensus-critical requirements. > > It is not possible to build BCCore wallets without the node at this time.
You're right, brain slip: Debian is using the embedded leveldb distributed by bitcoin for the blockchain and have for several months. Berkeley DB is used for wallets. Berkeley DB (libdb) is what is going to be dropped since they were re-licensed AGPL3 (amongst other reasons). Debian has been using Berkeley DB for a while in bitcoin (long before I got involved) with the --with-incompatible-libdb configure flag, so this may cause a problem since BDB has notorious compatibility issues between versions. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
