[oi-dev] 1262 Berkeley-db package

[Alasdair Lumsden]

Hi Jeff, Bayard,

Bayard - nice review points!

On 3 Oct 2011, at 18:06, Bayard G. Bell wrote:
<snip>
> 2) is there any basis for thinking that bdb should only be built for
> 32-bit support, or would we reasonably expect that 64-bit binaries would
> need to link against it?

For a library like bdb, we should ship 64bit binaries/libraries.

> 3) it looks like the default behaviour for library link generation is to
> create links that look like lib<name>-<version>.so rather than
> lib<name>.so.<version>; which convention is expected for OI?

I'm not sure we should adjust the software vendor's defaults - and usually these are generated by libtool (I think!). But, the exception I'd say if other distros adjust the name, then we probably should too.

> 4) a lot of the content appears to be documentation; have you confirmed
> that all of it is correctly tagged with the doc facet?

Good catch.

<snip>
> 6) given the prevalence of bdb and how low it tends to be in the stack,
> might we also consider providing debug support? are there any standing
> rules on how that should be done?

No rules on debug support as far as I know. There might be some funky pkg5 way of delivering debug vs non-debug binaries but I'd have to look that up. I think it could be omitted on a first pass and added later if desired.

Cheers,

Alasdair