On OpenSolaris, libbdb is not shipped so Evolution still uses the
private copy of BDB.

Jeff
On Mon, 2008-10-06 at 22:15 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote:
> Rob,
> 
> IIRC, I had replied to Ross on a similar query, start GNOME 2.24. Still
> OpenSUSE ships with in-built libdb. I'm not aware of any other distro.
> 
> JPR, who use to maintain Evolution few years back, gave me the notes on
> why it was decided to go this way (forking libdb). So if we have answers
> for all those points, I'm fine for that. We don't want to break anything
> thatz fine otherwise. I'm not tracking libdb at all, if you have the
> answers, then lets recalculate and plan for it in 2.26.
> 
> -Srini.
> 
> On Mon, 2008-10-06 at 14:59 +0100, Rob Bradford wrote:
> > Since we're at the start of the cycle shall we go ahead and drop the
> > included libdb ? and thus add a formal requirement on using the system
> > version. AFAIK all the distributors ship with using the system
> > version...
> > 
> > I've updated the bug #410164 with a patch that makes this change.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Rob
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Evolution-hackers mailing list
> > Evolution-hackers@gnome.org
> > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
> email message attachment, "Attached message - Re: [Evolution-hackers]
> Removing libdb from EDS source"
> > -------- Forwarded Message --------
> > From: Srinivasa Ragavan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: Ross Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Cc: Evolution Hackers <evolution-hackers@gnome.org>
> > Subject: Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removing libdb from EDS source
> > Date: Mon, 05 May 2008 10:59:16 +0530
> > 
> > Ross, 
> > 
> > I had a chat with JP and He pointed me to a old README.
> > 
> > ===
> > The issue was around no backwards compatability, from the old README:
> > 
> >  - Berkeley's libdb - 3.1.17
> > 
> >    db3 is available from http://www.sleepycat.com. Make sure to get
> >    3.1.17, it isn't the latest version.
> > 
> >      --- IMPORTANT WARNING ---
> > 
> >      The on-disk format of DB files has been changing between versions
> >      2, 3 and 4.  Also, because of the libdb API, there is no way to
> >      easily handle the different formats from within the application.
> >      For this reason, Evolution has chosen to use one specific version
> >      of the library (version 3) and stick to it, so that users do not
> >      need to convert their addressbook files to use them with
> >      different version of Evolution.
> > 
> >      That's why Evolution REQUIRES libdb 3.1.17, and NO OTHER VERSION.
> > 
> >      If you force the check to accept a version different from 3.1.17,
> >      your binary of Evolution will be using a different format from
> >      the chosen one; this means that it will not be able to read
> >      addressbook databases created by other versions of Evolution
> >      which were compiled in the standard way.  Also, we DO NOT
> >      GUARRANTEE that Evolution will work with different versions of
> >      libdb at all, even if it can be trivially made to compile against
> >      them.
> > 
> >      SPECIAL NOTE FOR BINARY PACKAGERS:
> > 
> >      If you are making binary packages for end-users (e.g. if you are
> >      a distribution vendor), please statically link Evolution to
> >      Berkeley DB 3.1.17, as mandated by the configure.in check.  DO
> >      NOT patch configure.in to work around the check.  Forcing the
> >      check to link to a different version of the library will only
> >      give headaches and pain to your users, who will see their
> >      addressbook disappear and will complain to us (the Evolution
> >      team) about losing their data.
> > 
> >      Besides, libdb will be linked statically, which means that your
> >      distribution doesn't actually need to ship DB 3.1.17 itself
> >      separately.
> > 
> >      The Evolution team will be infinitely grateful for your
> >      co-operation.  Thanks.
> > 
> > This proved quite painful for distros (hanging on to a specific version)
> > though so we moved it inside e-d-s eventually.  That way we always had a
> > known quantity.
> > ===
> > 
> > Ross, if we have an answer for this, we can close on this immediately.
> > 
> > -Srini.
> > 
> > On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 08:46 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote:
> > > Ross,
> > > 
> > > IIRC, it was done because, every libdb update broke Evolution or libdb
> > > wasn't so stable release over release. Also OpenSUSE uses statically
> > > linked libdb. But most of the hackers I know, dynamically link libdb.
> > > I'm favor of the change. But lemme ping some old evolution hackers who
> > > were part of this change, to understand what they feel about it. 
> > > 
> > > -Srini
> > > On Thu, 2008-04-24 at 14:42 +0100, Ross Burton wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > I think that we should remove the fork of Berkeley DB from the Evolution
> > > > Data Server source.  Debian, Ubuntu, Gentoo and Fedora all use
> > > > --with-libdb to dynamically link to a system library, so it is known to
> > > > work.
> > > > 
> > > > This would involve removing libdb from svn, and always dynamically
> > > > linking to libdb instead.  --with-libdb would still exist for people who
> > > > want to use a custom libdb, but it would default to /usr.
> > > > 
> > > > Thoughts?
> > > > 
> > > > Ross
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Evolution-hackers mailing list
> > > > Evolution-hackers@gnome.org
> > > > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Evolution-hackers mailing list
> > > Evolution-hackers@gnome.org
> > > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
> _______________________________________________
> Evolution-hackers mailing list
> Evolution-hackers@gnome.org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers

_______________________________________________
Evolution-hackers mailing list
Evolution-hackers@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers

Reply via email to