RE: Really Weird Problem

["Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>]

At 05:11 PM 1/4/99 -0000, Jon Parry-McCulloch wrote:
>		Like what?
>
>	The things I mentioned below.

Then why not use OpenLDAP 1.1.2?  It includes the DB2 changes.

>		Updates to the configure system and util-int.c were made
>over the
>		weekend to ease this issue.  Previously -devel configure
>only
>		checked for the existance of ctime_r and not it's prototype.
>
>
>	Will thee changes to gonfig be mirrored in the CVS repository yet,
>as config seems not to be checking my header files.

The changes were committed on Saturday.  They still may be problematic.
As I said before, the reentrancy/thread-safe changes are quite young.

>		The linker itself core dumped?  or a specific application.
>	The linker. I told you it was weird.

Sounds like a bug in your linker!  :-)

>		The DB2 changes (ldbm_dataum_init and cursor changes) are in
>1.1.2.
>		Why do you need the ldif changes?  (ldif routines are not
>externalized).
>
>	When I copied over the files that included the cursor change and the
>ldbm_datum_init() function the vbersions I had also had the ldif names
>changed and it was easier just to tweak the code locally rather than locate
>the revision that contained the init() function only. maybe I screwed up.
>Oooops.

Merging -devel changes into release engineering 1.1 sources
is non-trivial and cannot be done (in general) by copying whole
files.

Kurt