Skiplist / best practice for 2.1 branch

[Henrique de Moraes Holschuh]

On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Jonathan Marsden wrote:
> On 18 Nov 2002, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh writes:
> > 1. Heavily tested and debugged AND patched BerkeleyDB 3.2, stay away
> >    from 4.x for now.  (i.e. use the ones from RedHat or Debian, not
> >    upstream).
> 
> Red Hat now supplies 4.0.14, for example the db4-4.0.14-14.i386.rpm in

Then stick to Debian :-)

> Red Hat 8.0.  It appears to work OK for me, but we have small setups
> only here... maybe we have just not met the bug(s) yet??

Well, people report a good range of trouble with DB4 in this list, but not
many in DB 3.2.  Maybe too few of us still use 3.2, though.

> In general, though the statement "Use 3.2... ie. use the ones from
> RedHat or Debian ..." is confusing, because for Red Hat 8.x users, the
> current RH-supplied production release of these libraries is now
> 4.0.14.

I will keep that in mind.

> Are you recommending that RH 8.0 users running Cyrus should downgrade
> their BDB libraries to a 3.x RPM set for db3 (perhaps as supplied for

No. That will break the OS.

> What will it take to get some/all of these patches into 2.1.11 or 2.2
> or both?  Is that a worthwhile objective?  Or are these changes so

No. CMU is slowly making their mind about the patches while they study them,
but they will take a lot of time to leak into cyrus.  And I don't expect all
of them to, either.

> Linux-specific that they have would negative consequences if applied
> to a source tree used for a Solaris or *BSD build??  With Linux being

No negative consequences that I know of.  But increased resilience hides the
real problems sometimes.

> putting this info into a FAQ (as well as making it the default in 2.2)
> seems approriate.

It is in both AFAIK.

-- 
  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh