>> Just  to be  clear  -- they  could  link against  it  using the  same,
>> standard functionality  that FreeBSD uses. They  couldn't link against
>> it and use all the additional features/functionality.
> So we'll have  to document, which functions  it is Ok to  call and which
> arguments/flags can and can not be passed to them. Brrrgh...

As a system distributor in a previous life, "Brrrgh" indeed. :-)

The way we've done this for previous systems is not try and
document how it can be called, but only permit use *through*
the system's library, that is, use it via getpwent(), the
libc network functions and so on.

>> My guess is that your answer remains the same -- and, that's cool, I'm
>> used to  losing this argument,  I do so about  twice a year.  :-) Just
>> wanted to be clear.
> Well, can someone comment on the useability  of gdbm? I know, it has dbm
> and ndbm compatibility "mode" and  a less restrictive license. Should we
> switch over to it?

This isn't necessary.  The *current* FreeBSD libc Berkeley DB sources
are completely safe -- they're under a UC Regents copyright notice.
This discussion is only regarding the possibility of making the Berkeley
DB 3.X functionality available to the FreeBSD community and its customers.


Keith Bostic
Sleepycat Software Inc.         [EMAIL PROTECTED]
118 Tower Rd.                   +1-781-259-3139
Lincoln, MA 01773               http://www.sleepycat.com

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to