Le Wed, Jul 07, 1999 at 08:58:03AM -0400, Kermit Tensmeyer écrivait: > Why must the system need (db 1.85, db 2.1.2, db 2.4.3 <and with the > new potato db 2.6.X>)? From the list of things that broke when I > upgraded then only software that seemed to have a real dependence > might be the nss_db code. > > bind, exim, sendmail, xemacs all prefer the newer db libararies. In > order to use the previous version (1.85) each product has to eliminate > basic functionality. > > Is there some (not so obvious) reason why this products have not been > rebuilt with the latest version of the libraries?
Backward compatibility. > Ouch! libdb 2.4.14 has well known deficenies. See the changes file > as www.sleepycat.com. This is at least 18 months old. keeping abreast > of the bug-fixes and subsitent library upgrades would seem to be a > critical priority, would it not? I don't know if we have libdb 2.4.24 but that's the version number menionned in /usr/include/libdb.h ... You may ask directly to Joel Klecker the libc maintainer for more information about which version is in libc ... Cheers, -- Hertzog Raphaël >> 0C4CABF1 >> http://prope.insa-lyon.fr/~rhertzog/
