Matthias Julius <m...@julius-net.net> writes: > Paul Wise <p...@debian.org> writes: > >> I don't see anything in the maintainer scripts that would migrate the >> db files. Does dnshistory or libdb handle upgrading the on-disk db >> format? Or can libdb handle older versions of the on-disk db format? > > I was assuming the latter. But, reading > http://www.oracle.com/technology/documentation/berkeley-db/db/ref/am/upgrade.html > this does not look like a safe assumption.
According to http://www.oracle.com/technology/documentation/berkeley-db/db/ref/upgrade/process.html it is not even safe to assume that the API of a new major or minor version is backwards compatible. This means that a binNMU triggered by a libdb transition may cause the application to FTBS or not to work correctly. Therefore, I am beginning to think that build-depending on libdb-dev is not such a good idea. I am considering to build-depend on libdb4.7-dev to address a number of issues: - dnshistory can be tested when it is to be rebuilt with a new libdb version - when the database files need to be upgraded this can be mentioned in debian/NEWS - this allows to skip a couple of libdb versions potentially saving the users unnecessary database upgrades. Of course, this means there will be a new upload necessary every time the libdb version used is supposed to be dropped from the archive. Are there other reasons why I should not do that? Is there a convenient way to find all reverse build-depends of a package? Matthias -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org