httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marc Slemko <>
Subject Re: [patch] Glibc 2.1 / DB 2.0 support
Date Sun, 13 Sep 1998 01:59:17 GMT
On Sat, 12 Sep 1998, Dean Gaudet wrote:

> On Sat, 12 Sep 1998, Dan Jacobowitz wrote:
> > That's my point exactly.  The __GLIBC_MINOR__ + __GLIBC__ >= 3 will
> > fail for Redhat 5.1 - which is glibc 2.0 based.  Only in glibc 2.1 will
> > it succeed, and in glibc 2.1, db.h is for db version 2 (libdb2 on most
> > current systems that have it).  The two are not binary compatible.
> !@#$% fucking glibc developers.  Why the hell can't they maintain any
> shred of compatibility? 
> I don't want to have anything to do with this.  It's stupid.  I'm tired of
> putting in fucking kludges for every new version of glibc.  None of the
> commercial vendors are this bad, and they can be pretty capricious at
> times.
> If db2.0 is a completely brand new, non-backwards compatible db library
> then it shouldn't be linked with -ldb and shouldn't be #include "db.h". 

db2 with completely incompatible interfaces using the same -l and header
files has been around for a long time.  Most people just use the db_185.h
or whatever it is and install it as db.h, and the problem goes away.

So they didn't invent the dumbness, just decided to listen to the people
who did.  I would guess that is Bostic, sigh.

The "proper" solution is to add a db2 auth module, then have it detect if
-ldb and db.h support the "old" db or the "new" db.  Of course, even if
-ldb is db2, you may still have to use the 1.85 api on most systems.

db1.85 and db2 files aren't compatible, but files created using the 1.85
compat interface to db2 are compatible with db2 files.

View raw message