On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 02:25:43AM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > >>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Daniel> Ahem? You'd prefer we just stopped including libdb1 > Daniel> entirely and let all programs using it go to rot? That's > Daniel> what upstream did. > > And that's exactly what Ben Collins tried to do. He told me that it > was a Good Idea [tm] to make it as painful as possible to use db 1.85 > because it was a waste of time for him to support it, especially since > upstream didn't.
You're not listening to yourself. I was objecting to your comment that we did _worse_ than upstream on compatibility. Which is untrue. > Daniel> We added libdb1-compat ourselves to > Daniel> minimize the pain of the transition, and it did. > > You're missing some history, I suspect. That (or at least the libc6 > dependency) didn't happen until *after* I bitched, OK? And it > wouldn't have done a damn bit of good anyway. I got hosed because db1 > was emulated using the db3 library, and the libdb1 package was broken > because it somehow did the same thing. Even the dump utilities didn't > work, so I couldn't build Coda with db3 and translate the permissions > databases. There was *zero* functionality left in Debian binary > packages to deal with db1 _databases_. Sure, get rid of the legacy > libraries if it's a waste of time for you to maintain them, but don't > get between me and my legacy _data_. > > Jan Harkes was so peeved he almost did rm -rf debian in the Coda > sources. You'll also notice that you didn't have this problem until the point where db1-compat was moved from libc to a separate package. Upstream dropped it a LONG time before that: 2000-01-01 Ulrich Drepper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Makeconfig (all-subdirs): Remove db and db2. * db/*: Removed. * db2/*: Removed. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer