[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: BerkeleyDB versions
Kari Mattsson wrote:
If 'D' is the best companion for 'O', it is evolutionary to allow 'O+1'
to still work with 'D'.
Requiring 'D+1' with 'O+1' makes upgrades more difficult to arrange as a
So, maybe my point is change management.
As Quanah already said, change management is no different here than it has ever
been: slapcat with the old version, slapadd with the new. That has always been
the recommended upgrade procedure.
As an aside, the current back-bdb code will still compile and work properly
with everything going back to BDB 4.0 (if you can still find a copy of that
anywhere). You just have to tell the configure script to skip the version check
if you really want to run things that way. But there are plenty of good reasons
not to keep using those old BDB releases, which is why we raise the
requirements in the configure script.
-- Howard Chu
Chief Architect, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/