[oi-dev] [userland] Re: 1262 Berkeley-db package

[Igor Kozhukhov]

I have berkeleydb-5.1 at dilos-userland(from oracle-userland with additional
build flags for DEB tools) - works well with DEB tools such as: reprepro,
apt

You can try to check it on my IPS shared repo at
http://apt.dilos.org:10000/:
database/berkeleydb-5 at 5.1.25,5.11-1.1.1:20120219T012952Z
<http://apt.dilos.org:10000/info/0/database%2Fberkeleydb-5%405.1.25%2C5.11-1
.1.1%3A20120219T012952Z>

Best regards,
-Igor

From:  Bayard Bell <buffer.g.overflow at gmail.com>
Reply-To:  <userland at lists.illumos.org>
Date:  Tue, 28 Feb 2012 13:59:47 +0000
To:  OpenIndiana Developer mailing list <oi-dev at openindiana.org>,
<userland at lists.illumos.org>
Subject:  [userland] Re: [oi-dev] 1262 Berkeley-db package

> Was this ever committed? I reckon we need libdb (I need it for something ATM),
> and I don't find it in the history. I'm happy to pick this up and run with it.
> 
> Cheers,
> Bayard
> 
> On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Guido Berhoerster <gber at openindiana.org>
> wrote:
>> * Alasdair Lumsden <alasdairrr at gmail.com> [2011-10-05 01:31]:
>>> >
>>> > On 3 Oct 2011, at 23:31, Bayard G. Bell wrote:
>>> >
>>>> > > On Mon, 2011-10-03 at 17:08 -0400, Alex Viskovatoff wrote:
>>>>> > >> On Mon, 2011-10-03 at 16:34 -0400, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote:
>>>>>> > >>> Bayard made a good point, one will generally want multiple versions
of
>>>>>> > >>> bdb.
>>>>>> > >>> Thoughts about having bdb-4.8 (and bdb-5.2)?
>>>>> > >>
>>>>> > >> Can you or he give examples of why one would want that? It would be a
>>>>> > >> nuisance, because one would have to decide on some naming convention,
so
>>>>> > >> that multiple versions could be installed together. Do Linux
>>>>> > >> distributions ship multiple versions of bdb?
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Ubuntu, for example, delivers libdb4.6, libdb4.7, and libdb4.8 for
>>>> > > libraries. (I'm running BackTrack 5, which is based off 10.04, so this
>>>> > > is a bit dated.) The distro simply doesn't deliver any links to the
>>>> > > libraries, so everything has to decide which version to link against by
>>>> > > both major and minor version. I've ended up with one each for the core
C
>>>> > > runtime because I have essentially three packages, each using a
>>>> > > different version. I've seen similar things in other porting
>>>> > > environments, which leads me to suspect that, if there's a nuisance
>>>> > > argument, it's that, as a porting system carries more packages, it
>>>> > > decides the greatest nuisance is forcing them all to use one version of
>>>> > > BDB.
>>> >
>>> > That's an important point.
>>> >
>>> > That presumably means drop:
>>> >
>>> > link path=usr/lib/libdb-4.so target=libdb-4.8.so <http://libdb-4.8.so>
>>> > link path=usr/lib/libdb.so target=libdb-4.8.so <http://libdb-4.8.so>
>> 
>> You should have those links at least for the "default version" so
>> the linker finds it when passed -ldb.
>> --
>> Guido Berhoerster
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> oi-dev mailing list
>> oi-dev at openindiana.org
>> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
> 
>  illumos-userland | Archives
> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/191052/=now>
> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/191052/22234452-ff4867aa>  |
> Modify 
> <https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=22234452&id_secret=22234452-720b247
> f>  Your Subscription <http://www.listbox.com>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://openindiana.org/pipermail/oi-dev/attachments/20120228/4f647c1a/attachment-0005.html>