Philip Brown wrote on 02.09.2009 23:16: > On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Dagobert Michelsen<[email protected]> wrote: >> Am 02.09.2009 um 19:00 schrieb Philip Brown: >>> I previously suggested/requested that our berkeleydb maintainer(s), >>> repackage the "berkeleyedb4" package, to include the old binaries for >>> the shared libs, until they are no longer used. >>> This basically echos our "normal" policies about shared libs. >> This[standard?] policy is there to avoid having multiple packages with >> one version each. Currently we already have multiple packages >> and correct dependencies to each package version. There is no >> need to put all in one package. Essentially, you say "go back >> to the old scheme and let's see that we update all builds >> to old versions". > > That "old scheme" is a bit ambigous. Lets be a bit more explicit, and > say "go back to CSW STANDARD scheme". > > And lets continue to be explicit and spell out the future path for berkeleydb: > > Once applications have been recompiled to no longer use berkeleydb4X > versions of the shared libs, that versioned virtual package should be > completely removed from our repository. > > older berkeleydb4X packages should be in transition to non-existance, > once their dependants are gone.
I didn't jump in on the discussion where Dago initially requested feedback for the bdb packaging change [1], but as the bdb stuff caused some hickups some wider discussion might help. Just to understand the status quo: - We do have a CSWbdb package which currently holds 4.7.x, lives in /opt/csw/lib (/opt/csw/lib/libdb.so to be precise), and which might get upgraded to 4.7+ sometime in the future? - Previous CSWbdb packages (like CSWbdb44) lived within their own /opt/csw/lib/bdb4X/ prefix and have been replaced by stub packages containting symlinks to /opt/csw/lib/libdb.so to preserve functionality of existing packages? - Packages linked against previous CSWbdb packages should be changed to link against /opt/csw/lib/libdb.so (or to a symlink named libdb-4.7.so which is also installed by CSWbdb)? Now that we have a "moving version" libdb.so file (plus already existing packages linked against previous versions), the one question that comes to my mind is ABI compatibility? Dago mentioned BDB should be ABI backward-compatible, but i couldn't find any page actually saying so. The only thing i found sounds a bit like the opposite [2]: "Berkeley DB major and minor releases may optionally include changes in all four areas, that is, the application API, region files, database formats, and log files may not be backward-compatible with previous releases." I know API != ABI, but API changes can break ABI compatibility and i couldn't come up with a reference that guarantees ABI compatibility. Sebastian [1]http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/maintainers/2009-May/002726.html [2]http://www.oracle.com/technology/documentation/berkeley-db/db/ref/upgrade/process.html _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
