RE: "Allow backup" extended operation

[Hallvard B Furuseth <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no>]

[Sorry if this message is duplicated]

Howard Chu writes:
> I think this is a bit of overkill. One of the reasons for developing
> back-bdb was to have a backend that supports hot backups... Since this
> facility exists, and back-ldbm is no longer getting any new features
> implemented, I don't see any reason to do anything further.

Great!

Except...we need ldbm here, becuase it supports aliases:-(
I don't know the alias code... why is is it enclosed in
'#ifdef BDB_ALIASES'?  Would it be much work to fix it?
Or should it be thrown out and rewritten from scratch?

-- 
Hallvard