This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sourceware.cygnus.com mailing list for the glibc project.

Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Start of db 3.0.x support for nss_db


   From: Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de>
   Date: 05 Jan 2000 10:07:56 +0100

   I'm adding a first patch for db30 support.  I also need to update
   makedb.c but like to hear your comments before I continue.

Unfortunately, the DB error return codes (DB_KEYEMPTY and DB_NOTFOUND)
were also changed in DB 3.X.

Fortunately, the release notes for 3.0.55 say:

   The Berkeley DB interfaces have been reworked in the 3.0.55 release
   for two reasons. The goals were as follows: to make the Berkeley DB
   structures opaque so future releases of Berkeley DB can be binary
   compatible with each other, ...

so the interfaces may stabilize, and adding support for DB 3.X seems
to be a good move!

However, I'm not sure whether having a fixed list of library names is
such a good idea.  The format of the databases on disk depens in the
DB version.  A hard-coded list means that if the DB library is
upgraded, the nss_db module might stop working.  This can be fixed by
regenerating the databases, but what if the someone uses a different
LD_LIBRARY_PATH from time to time, or worse, has applications with
different RPATH's?  I think we should allow the user to specify the
path of the DB library in a configuration file to make sure there will
be no nasty surprises.

Mark

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]