Re: [blfs-support] Berkeley DB
On Sun, 2020-09-27 at 17:27 -0400, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: > On 9/27/20 4:20 PM, Pierre Labastie via blfs-support wrote: > > On Sun, 2020-09-27 at 09:32 -0400, Scott Andrews via blfs-support > > wrote: > > > On 9/27/20 9:24 AM, Elias Rudberg via blfs-support wrote: > > > > > > *Affero* GPL is problematic. For example, in BLFS we have > > > > > > PHP > > > > > > linked > > > > > > [...] > > > > About the GNU Affero General Public License, this might be > > > > relevant: > > > > > > > > https://drewdevault.com/2020/07/27/Anti-AGPL-propaganda.html > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Elias > > > Now that stance I can agree with > > > > > I am not a lawyer, but not a conspiracy theorist either. What I see > > is > > that fedora and debian/ubuntu are at 5.3.28. There is certainly a > > reason, which is not founded only on what Google say. Those distros > > have lawyers. > > > > Now why did blfs include version 6.x at a time? The reason is that > > it > > was an error. When it was realized that it was an error, it was > > reverted to version 5.3.28. Those sorts of things happen. > > > > Pierre > > > It was version 7.5 to 8.4, that would be an extensive error covering > a > few YEARS. Yes. Recently, in one of the package mailing lists I monitor, I've seen that somebody fixed a bug which had been there for more than 20 years... > > If you research the license you will find that it is basically GPL3. > In > fact it mentions that GPL3 applies several times. > > Debian/raspberry pi is at 5.1.29-9 to 5.3.28. BTW I have never been > a > fan of fedora, but I did use redhat 7.0 back in the day, not the > recent > enterprise version Major distros stay at version 5. We've been told there are license problems. They have lawyers. We don't. What do you want us to conclude? Note that I've read carefully all those licenses, because I develop two packages (jhalfs and blocaled). I've never been sure I was understanding anything. But just in case, I've removed some parts of jhalfs because they were GPL'd, while the other parts were under MIT license, and it seems it is not permissible to include GPL'd work into non GPL'd work (whether the license is more permissive or it is less permissive than GPL)... Pierre -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] Berkeley DB
On 9/27/20 4:20 PM, Pierre Labastie via blfs-support wrote: On Sun, 2020-09-27 at 09:32 -0400, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: On 9/27/20 9:24 AM, Elias Rudberg via blfs-support wrote: *Affero* GPL is problematic. For example, in BLFS we have PHP linked [...] About the GNU Affero General Public License, this might be relevant: https://drewdevault.com/2020/07/27/Anti-AGPL-propaganda.html Best regards, Elias Now that stance I can agree with I am not a lawyer, but not a conspiracy theorist either. What I see is that fedora and debian/ubuntu are at 5.3.28. There is certainly a reason, which is not founded only on what Google say. Those distros have lawyers. Now why did blfs include version 6.x at a time? The reason is that it was an error. When it was realized that it was an error, it was reverted to version 5.3.28. Those sorts of things happen. Pierre It was version 7.5 to 8.4, that would be an extensive error covering a few YEARS. If you research the license you will find that it is basically GPL3. In fact it mentions that GPL3 applies several times. Debian/raspberry pi is at 5.1.29-9 to 5.3.28. BTW I have never been a fan of fedora, but I did use redhat 7.0 back in the day, not the recent enterprise version -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] Berkeley DB
On Sun, 2020-09-27 at 09:32 -0400, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: > On 9/27/20 9:24 AM, Elias Rudberg via blfs-support wrote: > > > > *Affero* GPL is problematic. For example, in BLFS we have PHP > > > > linked > > > > [...] > > > > About the GNU Affero General Public License, this might be > > relevant: > > > > https://drewdevault.com/2020/07/27/Anti-AGPL-propaganda.html > > > > Best regards, > > Elias > > Now that stance I can agree with > I am not a lawyer, but not a conspiracy theorist either. What I see is that fedora and debian/ubuntu are at 5.3.28. There is certainly a reason, which is not founded only on what Google say. Those distros have lawyers. Now why did blfs include version 6.x at a time? The reason is that it was an error. When it was realized that it was an error, it was reverted to version 5.3.28. Those sorts of things happen. Pierre -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] Berkeley DB
On 9/27/20 9:24 AM, Elias Rudberg via blfs-support wrote: *Affero* GPL is problematic. For example, in BLFS we have PHP linked [...] About the GNU Affero General Public License, this might be relevant: https://drewdevault.com/2020/07/27/Anti-AGPL-propaganda.html Best regards, Elias Now that stance I can agree with -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] Berkeley DB
On 9/27/20 9:13 AM, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: On 9/27/20 8:47 AM, Xi Ruoyao via blfs-support wrote: On 2020-09-27 08:38 -0400, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: On 9/26/20 6:39 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-support wrote: This is not a true open source version. Oracle is not friendly to open source. In your link below you have to "sign in" to get the source code. Note that Arch and Debian also use version 5.3.28. -- Bruce Here are the direct links to download the various versions, Notice no registration required http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-18.1.40.tar.gz http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-5.3.28.tar.gz http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-6.0.20.tar.gz http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-6.1.19.tar.gz http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-6.1.26.tar.gz http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-6.2.23.tar.gz So the GPL license is not an open source version? I beg to differ *Affero* GPL is problematic. For example, in BLFS we have PHP linked to Berkeley DB. If PHP is linked to an AGPL Berkeley DB, and you serve a website with this PHP build, then technically *everyone* who has viewed your website can demend a copy of the PHP source code of your entire website. It would be illegal to refuse them. Then those who don't want to give the source code of the entire website will have to pay some money to Oracle. That is NOT what the license states: * The GNU Affero General Public License is designed specifically to * ensure that, in such cases, the modified source code becomes available * to the community. It requires the operator of a network server to * provide the source code of the modified version running there to the * users of that server. Therefore, public use of a modified version, on * a publicly accessible server, gives the public access to the source * code of the modified version. * * An older license, called the Affero General Public License and * published by Affero, was designed to accomplish similar goals. This is * a different license, not a version of the Affero GPL, but Affero has * released a new version of the Affero GPL which permits re-licensing under * this license. * http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.html You see it is talking about modifications to Berkley db, I see no reference in the license about anything other than the db. According to your explanation if i read correctly.if you host on a ms windows server you would then need to provide the source and executables for windows 10, that is absurd Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, if you modify the Program, your modified version must prominently offer all users interacting with it remotely through a computer network (if your version supports such interaction) an opportunity to receive the Corresponding Source of your version by providing access to the Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge, through some standard or customary means of facilitating copying of software. This Corresponding Source shall include the Corresponding Source for any work covered by version 3 of the GNU General Public License that is incorporated pursuant to the following paragraph. Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, you have permission to link or combine any covered work with a work licensed under version 3 of the GNU General Public License into a single combined work, and to convey the resulting work. The terms of this License will continue to apply to the part which is the covered work, but the work with which it is combined will remain governed by version 3 of the GNU General Public License. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] Berkeley DB
*Affero* GPL is problematic. For example, in BLFS we have PHP linked [...] About the GNU Affero General Public License, this might be relevant: https://drewdevault.com/2020/07/27/Anti-AGPL-propaganda.html Best regards, Elias -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] Berkeley DB
On 9/27/20 8:47 AM, Xi Ruoyao via blfs-support wrote: On 2020-09-27 08:38 -0400, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: On 9/26/20 6:39 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-support wrote: This is not a true open source version. Oracle is not friendly to open source. In your link below you have to "sign in" to get the source code. Note that Arch and Debian also use version 5.3.28. -- Bruce Here are the direct links to download the various versions, Notice no registration required http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-18.1.40.tar.gz http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-5.3.28.tar.gz http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-6.0.20.tar.gz http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-6.1.19.tar.gz http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-6.1.26.tar.gz http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-6.2.23.tar.gz So the GPL license is not an open source version? I beg to differ *Affero* GPL is problematic. For example, in BLFS we have PHP linked to Berkeley DB. If PHP is linked to an AGPL Berkeley DB, and you serve a website with this PHP build, then technically *everyone* who has viewed your website can demend a copy of the PHP source code of your entire website. It would be illegal to refuse them. Then those who don't want to give the source code of the entire website will have to pay some money to Oracle. That is NOT what the license states: * The GNU Affero General Public License is designed specifically to * ensure that, in such cases, the modified source code becomes available * to the community. It requires the operator of a network server to * provide the source code of the modified version running there to the * users of that server. Therefore, public use of a modified version, on * a publicly accessible server, gives the public access to the source * code of the modified version. * * An older license, called the Affero General Public License and * published by Affero, was designed to accomplish similar goals. This is * a different license, not a version of the Affero GPL, but Affero has * released a new version of the Affero GPL which permits re-licensing under * this license. * http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.html You see it is talking about modifications to Berkley db, I see no reference in the license about anything other than the db. According to your explanation if i read correctly.if you host on a ms windows server you would then need to provide the source and executables for windows 10, that is absurd -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] Berkeley DB
On 2020-09-27 08:38 -0400, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: > > On 9/26/20 6:39 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-support wrote: > > > > > > > > > > This is not a true open source version. Oracle is not friendly to > > > > open source. In your link below you have to "sign in" to get the > > > > source code. > > > > > > > > Note that Arch and Debian also use version 5.3.28. > > > > > > > > -- Bruce > > > > Here are the direct links to download the various versions, Notice no > registration required > > http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-18.1.40.tar.gz > > http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-5.3.28.tar.gz > > http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-6.0.20.tar.gz > http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-6.1.19.tar.gz > http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-6.1.26.tar.gz > http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-6.2.23.tar.gz > > So the GPL license is not an open source version? I beg to differ *Affero* GPL is problematic. For example, in BLFS we have PHP linked to Berkeley DB. If PHP is linked to an AGPL Berkeley DB, and you serve a website with this PHP build, then technically *everyone* who has viewed your website can demend a copy of the PHP source code of your entire website. It would be illegal to refuse them. Then those who don't want to give the source code of the entire website will have to pay some money to Oracle. -- Xi Ruoyao School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] Berkeley DB
On 9/26/20 6:39 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-support wrote: This is not a true open source version. Oracle is not friendly to open source. In your link below you have to "sign in" to get the source code. Note that Arch and Debian also use version 5.3.28. -- Bruce Here are the direct links to download the various versions, Notice no registration required http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-18.1.40.tar.gz http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-5.3.28.tar.gz http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-6.0.20.tar.gz http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-6.1.19.tar.gz http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-6.1.26.tar.gz http://download.oracle.com/berkeley-db/db-6.2.23.tar.gz So the GPL license is not an open source version? I beg to differ -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] Berkeley DB
On 9/26/20 11:33 PM, Christopher Gregory via blfs-support wrote: Sent: Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 1:36 PM From: "Bruce Dubbs via blfs-support" To: blfs-support@lists.linuxfromscratch.org Cc: "Bruce Dubbs" Subject: Re: [blfs-support] Berkeley DB On 9/26/20 6:36 PM, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: On 9/26/20 6:40 PM, Ken Moffat via blfs-support wrote: On Sat, Sep 26, 2020 at 06:18:14PM -0400, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: On 9/26/20 5:44 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-support wrote: On 9/26/20 4:26 PM, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: Beyond Linux® From Scratch - Version 7.5 Chapter 22. Databases Berkeley DB-6.0.20 Beyond Linux® From Scratch (System V Edition) - Version 9.0 Chapter 22. Databases Berkeley DB-5.3.28 Why was Berkeley DB-6.0.20 reverted to Berkeley DB-5.3.28? These both are way behind, Berkeley DB 18.1 (18.1.40) https://www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/berkeleydb-downloads.html This is not a true open source version. Oracle is not friendly to open source. In your link below you have to "sign in" to get the source code. Note that Arch and Debian also use version 5.3.28. -- Bruce Berkley DB was at DB-6.0.20 in BLFS Version 7.5, WHY REVERT? I remember being involved in the revert, but it was a long while ago and I do not recall the details, but probably that the DB-6 version was not being used by anyone else, and therefore it seemed like a bad idea. Please find the last version where we used DB-6, then look at the changelog in the next version, and then look at the list archives around that date (primarily for -dev, but I suspect someone also asked on -support after the change). Beyond Linux® From Scratch - Version 8.2 Berkeley DB-6.2.23 Beyond Linux® From Scratch - Version 8.3 Berkeley DB-5.3.28 Or, you can compile whatever software/versions you wish on your own system. But if you are distributing binaries, remember to check that the licenses are compatible. More generally, when we decide to revert versions that often gets discussed on -dev and will therefore be in the archives (sometimes the problem is pointed out on -support before we revert, other times it's all on -dev). There is no good reason to revert it: http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/ticket/10989 * The Oracle Berkeley DB product is licensed * under the GNU AFFERO GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE: * * * GNU AFFERO GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE * Version 3, 19 November 2007 I use db-6.0.20 with rpm and yellowdog updater No issues, I also have some pgms written by me that use the rpm db and they have not failed to function. Your distro, your rules. -- Bruce -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page This is just a slimeball who has too much time on its hands. It has never done anything for anyone other than itself in its worthless existence. It is probably an employee of Oracle that is busy sucking its daddies DICK whilst posting this garbage to the list. Who the fuck cares that it is using rpm on a NON redhat system. So bottom line shit for brains: DO NOT POST ANYTHING TO THIS MAILING LIST IF YOU WANT YOUR MAIL SERVER TO SURVIVE. Christopher. So you who doesn't know anything about me has to verbally attack someone asking why Berkley db was revered. That happens to be a VALID question. So far I have not gotten an answer to that question that has any merit. The fact that versions of Berkley db has been used in several versions of LFS/BLFS shows that there isn't any technical reason it can not be used, as the books state that it works for that version of the book. The license is a dual license and the only change was to GPL it so it really are no reason to use it. LFS/BLFS uses some questionable licensed packages as a standard practice. Again post a VALID reason for not using or reverting to an older version. I will post what I please, i will not be intimidated by you or anyone else. The fact that you have not been removed from these mailing lists also speaks volumes about LFS. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] Berkeley DB
On 9/26/20 10:33 PM, Christopher Gregory via blfs-support wrote: [deleted trask talk] Christopher. Stop posting this type of thing or you will be blocked. -- Bruce -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] Berkeley DB
> Sent: Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 1:36 PM > From: "Bruce Dubbs via blfs-support" > To: blfs-support@lists.linuxfromscratch.org > Cc: "Bruce Dubbs" > Subject: Re: [blfs-support] Berkeley DB > > On 9/26/20 6:36 PM, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: > > > > On 9/26/20 6:40 PM, Ken Moffat via blfs-support wrote: > >> On Sat, Sep 26, 2020 at 06:18:14PM -0400, Scott Andrews via > >> blfs-support wrote: > >>> On 9/26/20 5:44 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-support wrote: > >>>> On 9/26/20 4:26 PM, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: > >>>>> Beyond Linux® From Scratch - Version 7.5 > >>>>> Chapter 22. Databases > >>>>> > >>>>> Berkeley DB-6.0.20 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Beyond Linux® From Scratch (System V Edition) - Version 9.0 > >>>>> Chapter 22. Databases > >>>>> > >>>>> Berkeley DB-5.3.28 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Why was Berkeley DB-6.0.20 reverted to Berkeley DB-5.3.28? > >>>>> > >>>>> These both are way behind, Berkeley DB 18.1 (18.1.40) > >>>>> > >>>>> https://www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/berkeleydb-downloads.html > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> This is not a true open source version. Oracle is not friendly to open > >>>> source. In your link below you have to "sign in" to get the source > >>>> code. > >>>> > >>>> Note that Arch and Debian also use version 5.3.28. > >>>> > >>>> -- Bruce > >>> > >>> Berkley DB was at DB-6.0.20 in BLFS Version 7.5, WHY REVERT? > >>> > >>> > >> I remember being involved in the revert, but it was a long while ago > >> and I do not recall the details, but probably that the DB-6 version > >> was not being used by anyone else, and therefore it seemed like a > >> bad idea. > >> > >> Please find the last version where we used DB-6, then look at the > >> changelog in the next version, and then look at the list archives > >> around that date (primarily for -dev, but I suspect someone also > >> asked on -support after the change). > > > > Beyond Linux® From Scratch - Version 8.2 Berkeley DB-6.2.23 > > > > Beyond Linux® From Scratch - Version 8.3 Berkeley DB-5.3.28 > > > > > >> > >> Or, you can compile whatever software/versions you wish on your own > >> system. But if you are distributing binaries, remember to check > >> that the licenses are compatible. > >> > >> More generally, when we decide to revert versions that often gets > >> discussed on -dev and will therefore be in the archives (sometimes > >> the problem is pointed out on -support before we revert, other times > >> it's all on -dev). > > > > There is no good reason to revert it: > > http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/ticket/10989 > > > > * The Oracle Berkeley DB product is licensed > > * under the GNU AFFERO GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE: > > * > > * > > * GNU AFFERO GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE > > * Version 3, 19 November 2007 > > > > > > I use db-6.0.20 with rpm and yellowdog updater > > > > No issues, I also have some pgms written by me that use the rpm db and > > they have not failed to function. > > Your distro, your rules. > >-- Bruce > > > -- > http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support > FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html > Unsubscribe: See the above information page > This is just a slimeball who has too much time on its hands. It has never done anything for anyone other than itself in its worthless existence. It is probably an employee of Oracle that is busy sucking its daddies DICK whilst posting this garbage to the list. Who the fuck cares that it is using rpm on a NON redhat system. So bottom line shit for brains: DO NOT POST ANYTHING TO THIS MAILING LIST IF YOU WANT YOUR MAIL SERVER TO SURVIVE. Christopher. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] Berkeley DB
On 9/26/20 6:36 PM, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: On 9/26/20 6:40 PM, Ken Moffat via blfs-support wrote: On Sat, Sep 26, 2020 at 06:18:14PM -0400, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: On 9/26/20 5:44 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-support wrote: On 9/26/20 4:26 PM, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: Beyond Linux® From Scratch - Version 7.5 Chapter 22. Databases Berkeley DB-6.0.20 Beyond Linux® From Scratch (System V Edition) - Version 9.0 Chapter 22. Databases Berkeley DB-5.3.28 Why was Berkeley DB-6.0.20 reverted to Berkeley DB-5.3.28? These both are way behind, Berkeley DB 18.1 (18.1.40) https://www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/berkeleydb-downloads.html This is not a true open source version. Oracle is not friendly to open source. In your link below you have to "sign in" to get the source code. Note that Arch and Debian also use version 5.3.28. -- Bruce Berkley DB was at DB-6.0.20 in BLFS Version 7.5, WHY REVERT? I remember being involved in the revert, but it was a long while ago and I do not recall the details, but probably that the DB-6 version was not being used by anyone else, and therefore it seemed like a bad idea. Please find the last version where we used DB-6, then look at the changelog in the next version, and then look at the list archives around that date (primarily for -dev, but I suspect someone also asked on -support after the change). Beyond Linux® From Scratch - Version 8.2 Berkeley DB-6.2.23 Beyond Linux® From Scratch - Version 8.3 Berkeley DB-5.3.28 Or, you can compile whatever software/versions you wish on your own system. But if you are distributing binaries, remember to check that the licenses are compatible. More generally, when we decide to revert versions that often gets discussed on -dev and will therefore be in the archives (sometimes the problem is pointed out on -support before we revert, other times it's all on -dev). There is no good reason to revert it: http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/ticket/10989 * The Oracle Berkeley DB product is licensed * under the GNU AFFERO GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE: * * * GNU AFFERO GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE * Version 3, 19 November 2007 I use db-6.0.20 with rpm and yellowdog updater No issues, I also have some pgms written by me that use the rpm db and they have not failed to function. Your distro, your rules. -- Bruce -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] Berkeley DB
On 9/26/20 6:40 PM, Ken Moffat via blfs-support wrote: On Sat, Sep 26, 2020 at 06:18:14PM -0400, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: On 9/26/20 5:44 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-support wrote: On 9/26/20 4:26 PM, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: Beyond Linux® From Scratch - Version 7.5 Chapter 22. Databases Berkeley DB-6.0.20 Beyond Linux® From Scratch (System V Edition) - Version 9.0 Chapter 22. Databases Berkeley DB-5.3.28 Why was Berkeley DB-6.0.20 reverted to Berkeley DB-5.3.28? These both are way behind, Berkeley DB 18.1 (18.1.40) https://www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/berkeleydb-downloads.html This is not a true open source version. Oracle is not friendly to open source. In your link below you have to "sign in" to get the source code. Note that Arch and Debian also use version 5.3.28. -- Bruce Berkley DB was at DB-6.0.20 in BLFS Version 7.5, WHY REVERT? I remember being involved in the revert, but it was a long while ago and I do not recall the details, but probably that the DB-6 version was not being used by anyone else, and therefore it seemed like a bad idea. Please find the last version where we used DB-6, then look at the changelog in the next version, and then look at the list archives around that date (primarily for -dev, but I suspect someone also asked on -support after the change). Beyond Linux® From Scratch - Version 8.2 Berkeley DB-6.2.23 Beyond Linux® From Scratch - Version 8.3 Berkeley DB-5.3.28 Or, you can compile whatever software/versions you wish on your own system. But if you are distributing binaries, remember to check that the licenses are compatible. More generally, when we decide to revert versions that often gets discussed on -dev and will therefore be in the archives (sometimes the problem is pointed out on -support before we revert, other times it's all on -dev). There is no good reason to revert it: http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/ticket/10989 * The Oracle Berkeley DB product is licensed * under the GNU AFFERO GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE: * * * GNU AFFERO GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE * Version 3, 19 November 2007 I use db-6.0.20 with rpm and yellowdog updater No issues, I also have some pgms written by me that use the rpm db and they have not failed to function. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] Berkeley DB
On 9/26/20 6:39 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-support wrote: On 9/26/20 5:18 PM, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: On 9/26/20 5:44 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-support wrote: On 9/26/20 4:26 PM, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: Beyond Linux® From Scratch - Version 7.5 Chapter 22. Databases Berkeley DB-6.0.20 Beyond Linux® From Scratch (System V Edition) - Version 9.0 Chapter 22. Databases Berkeley DB-5.3.28 Why was Berkeley DB-6.0.20 reverted to Berkeley DB-5.3.28? These both are way behind, Berkeley DB 18.1 (18.1.40) https://www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/berkeleydb-downloads.html This is not a true open source version. Oracle is not friendly to open source. In your link below you have to "sign in" to get the source code. BS, * The Oracle Berkeley DB product is licensed * under the GNU AFFERO GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE: * * * GNU AFFERO GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE * Version 3, 19 November 2007 Note that Arch and Debian also use version 5.3.28. -- Bruce Berkley DB was at DB-6.0.20 in BLFS Version 7.5, WHY REVERT? Because Oracle makes changes that break open source packages. More BS, Exactly which source packages are broken by DB-6.0.20? I get it you have a hardon for Oracle -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] Berkeley DB
On Sat, Sep 26, 2020 at 06:18:14PM -0400, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: > > On 9/26/20 5:44 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-support wrote: > > On 9/26/20 4:26 PM, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: > > > Beyond Linux® From Scratch - Version 7.5 > > > Chapter 22. Databases > > > > > > Berkeley DB-6.0.20 > > > > > > > > > Beyond Linux® From Scratch (System V Edition) - Version 9.0 > > > Chapter 22. Databases > > > > > > Berkeley DB-5.3.28 > > > > > > > > > Why was Berkeley DB-6.0.20 reverted to Berkeley DB-5.3.28? > > > > > > These both are way behind, Berkeley DB 18.1 (18.1.40) > > > > > > https://www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/berkeleydb-downloads.html > > > > > > This is not a true open source version. Oracle is not friendly to open > > source. In your link below you have to "sign in" to get the source > > code. > > > > Note that Arch and Debian also use version 5.3.28. > > > > -- Bruce > > > Berkley DB was at DB-6.0.20 in BLFS Version 7.5, WHY REVERT? > > I remember being involved in the revert, but it was a long while ago and I do not recall the details, but probably that the DB-6 version was not being used by anyone else, and therefore it seemed like a bad idea. Please find the last version where we used DB-6, then look at the changelog in the next version, and then look at the list archives around that date (primarily for -dev, but I suspect someone also asked on -support after the change). Or, you can compile whatever software/versions you wish on your own system. But if you are distributing binaries, remember to check that the licenses are compatible. More generally, when we decide to revert versions that often gets discussed on -dev and will therefore be in the archives (sometimes the problem is pointed out on -support before we revert, other times it's all on -dev). ĸen -- A really good hydrophobe has to be trained on dehydrated water from birth. I mean, that costs a fortune in magic alone. But they make great weather magicians. Rain clouds just give up and go away. -- The Colour of Magic -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] Berkeley DB
On 9/26/20 5:18 PM, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: On 9/26/20 5:44 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-support wrote: On 9/26/20 4:26 PM, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: Beyond Linux® From Scratch - Version 7.5 Chapter 22. Databases Berkeley DB-6.0.20 Beyond Linux® From Scratch (System V Edition) - Version 9.0 Chapter 22. Databases Berkeley DB-5.3.28 Why was Berkeley DB-6.0.20 reverted to Berkeley DB-5.3.28? These both are way behind, Berkeley DB 18.1 (18.1.40) https://www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/berkeleydb-downloads.html This is not a true open source version. Oracle is not friendly to open source. In your link below you have to "sign in" to get the source code. Note that Arch and Debian also use version 5.3.28. -- Bruce Berkley DB was at DB-6.0.20 in BLFS Version 7.5, WHY REVERT? Because Oracle makes changes that break open source packages. -- Bruce -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] Berkeley DB
On 9/26/20 5:44 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-support wrote: On 9/26/20 4:26 PM, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: Beyond Linux® From Scratch - Version 7.5 Chapter 22. Databases Berkeley DB-6.0.20 Beyond Linux® From Scratch (System V Edition) - Version 9.0 Chapter 22. Databases Berkeley DB-5.3.28 Why was Berkeley DB-6.0.20 reverted to Berkeley DB-5.3.28? These both are way behind, Berkeley DB 18.1 (18.1.40) https://www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/berkeleydb-downloads.html This is not a true open source version. Oracle is not friendly to open source. In your link below you have to "sign in" to get the source code. Note that Arch and Debian also use version 5.3.28. -- Bruce Berkley DB was at DB-6.0.20 in BLFS Version 7.5, WHY REVERT? -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] Berkeley DB
On 9/26/20 4:26 PM, Scott Andrews via blfs-support wrote: Beyond Linux® From Scratch - Version 7.5 Chapter 22. Databases Berkeley DB-6.0.20 Beyond Linux® From Scratch (System V Edition) - Version 9.0 Chapter 22. Databases Berkeley DB-5.3.28 Why was Berkeley DB-6.0.20 reverted to Berkeley DB-5.3.28? These both are way behind, Berkeley DB 18.1 (18.1.40) https://www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/berkeleydb-downloads.html This is not a true open source version. Oracle is not friendly to open source. In your link below you have to "sign in" to get the source code. Note that Arch and Debian also use version 5.3.28. -- Bruce -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
