RE: Berkeley DB 4

["Howard Chu" <hyc@highlandsun.com>]

Not at all. We're talking about libldbm and back-ldbm. There are several
ifdef's in ldbm.c that were apparently written to detect BDB 3.3. These
ifdef's prevented using libldbm (and thus back-ldbm) with the current BDB
4.0 release. I patched those ifdefs in the HEAD stream (and as I recall,
Kurt carried them into REL_ENG already) and so back-ldbm works fine with BDB
4.0. Without fixing those ifdefs, libldbm/ldbm.c does not compile correctly.
None of this has anything to do with back-bdb.

  -- Howard Chu
  Chief Architect, Symas Corp.       Director, Highland Sun
  http://www.symas.com               http://highlandsun.com/hyc
  Symas: Premier OpenSource Development and Support

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-openldap-devel@OpenLDAP.org
> [mailto:owner-openldap-devel@OpenLDAP.org]On Behalf Of Pierangelo
> Masarati

> > "Howard Chu" writes:
> > > There is no reason. The HEAD and REL_ENG streams have already
> been patched
> > > for BDB 4 support. It works fine when those ifdef's are fixed.
> >
> > > > unusable, perhaps unintentionally.  Any known reason why
> > > > db >= 4 shouldn't work in openldap?
> >
> > I tweaked the ifdefs, compile completed, and openldap built.
> > The test suite completed happily (which seems to mostly
> > test ldbm capability anyway).
>
> You're talking about two different things: if berkeley db api is detected
> by configure, or explicitly enforced, then back-ldbm will use db-3/4 as
> underlying database thru ldbm wrapping.  back-bdb is an experimental
> backend that directly uses berkeley's api (to exploit transactions).
>
> Pierangelo.
>