On Wed, 9 Jul 2003, David Walser wrote: > Buchan Milne wrote: > > And who decided to use gdbm for everything in 9.1?? >
> I dunno, but I see that as a whole lot better than using Sleepycat. Except in features, speed, scalability, and satisfying requirements for openldap-2.1 ... > AFAIK, gdbm hasn't broken compatibility with itself. That as opposed to > using Sleepycat that breaks every couple months when they decide to come > out with a new revision and not keep it compatible. What's good about > that? I'm tired of this db2, db3, db4, db4.1, db4.1099999 1/2 etc. I don't honestly think it was a conscious decision, since there were no buildconflicts added to the spec file, the change was not noted anywhere in the changelog, and 2 different databases people use for authentication broke on an upgrade from 9.0 to 9.1, without a warning. One was fixed by an update, the other one is still there, and still needs to be dealt with. Regards, Buchan -- |----------------Registered Linux User #182071-----------------| Buchan Milne Mechanical Engineer, Network Manager Cellphone * Work +27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x121 Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za GPG Key http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc 1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7 ****************************************************************** Please click on http://www.cae.co.za/disclaimer.htm to read our e-mail disclaimer or send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a copy. ******************************************************************
