[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

RE: HEADS UP: BerkeleyDB 4.2, libldif, etc.

To: "Howard Chu" <hyc@highlandsun.com>
Subject: RE: HEADS UP: BerkeleyDB 4.2, libldif, etc.
From: Hallvard B Furuseth <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no>
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 12:20:13 +0100
Cc: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>, openldap-devel@OpenLDAP.org
In-reply-to: <002b01c3ba50$0f288690$1801a8c0@CELLO>
References: <6.0.0.22.0.20031125142158.03cdb688@127.0.0.1> <002b01c3ba50$0f288690$1801a8c0@CELLO>

Howard Chu writes:
> Why don't we move libldbm into back-ldbm, while we're at it? It really
> has no purpose of its own.

That reminds me:

  ./configure --enable-bdb --enable-ldbm --with-ldbm-api=gdbm

fails with:

  configure: error: LDBM API not compatible with BDB

Is that beacuse back-bdb used libldbm once?  If so, configure need not
forbid this now.

-- 
Hallvard

Follow-Ups:
- RE: HEADS UP: BerkeleyDB 4.2, libldif, etc.
  - From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>

References:
- RE: HEADS UP: BerkeleyDB 4.2, libldif, etc.
  - From: "Howard Chu" <hyc@highlandsun.com>

Prev by Date: RE: HEADS UP: BerkeleyDB 4.2, libldif, etc.
Next by Date: RE: HEADS UP: BerkeleyDB 4.2, libldif, etc.
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread