[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: bdb and configure
Howard Chu wrote:
I notice that when BDB is enabled, the LDBM library is required to be
Berkeley. It seems we should have used a separate BDB_LIBS variable here; as
long as the LDBM API is not Berkeley we shouldn't really care what it is.
I.e., I think it would have been safe to have both gdbm and BerkeleyDB in use
in the same binary, yes?
It's only when LDBM is configured to use Berkeley and BDB/HDB are enabled
that all three must use the same Berkeley library, and then compatibility is
I don't see any problem about this. My main concern is that during
at least one of the tests for compatibility between bdb and ldbm, if
ol_enable_bdb is not "yes" a certain action is taken, which results
in setting ol_enable_bdb to "yes"; as a consequence, --enable-bdb=mod
has no effect, resulting in bdb being built statically; hdb, on the
contrary, can be built dynamically.
SysNet - via Dossi,8 27100 Pavia Tel: +390382573859 Fax: +390382476497