From owner-freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 9 19:46:30 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: gnome@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57678106567E; Fri, 9 May 2008 19:46:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marcus@marcuscom.com) Received: from creme-brulee.marcuscom.com (marcuscom-pt.tunnel.tserv1.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f00:ffff::1279]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA6C88FC26; Fri, 9 May 2008 19:46:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marcus@marcuscom.com) Received: from [IPv6:2001:470:1f00:2464::4] (shumai.marcuscom.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f00:2464::4]) by creme-brulee.marcuscom.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m49JlSaP012198; Fri, 9 May 2008 15:47:28 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from marcus@marcuscom.com) From: Joe Marcus Clarke To: Ade Lovett In-Reply-To: <2AEE026C-3528-457C-9D2B-5BF275126F25@FreeBSD.org> References: <2AEE026C-3528-457C-9D2B-5BF275126F25@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-V3ChPQ9AYzmW0gkiVThn" Organization: MarcusCom, Inc. Date: Fri, 09 May 2008 15:46:35 -0400 Message-Id: <1210362395.74326.31.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.1.1 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,NO_RELAYS autolearn=ham version=3.2.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.4 (2008-01-01) on creme-brulee.marcuscom.com Cc: gnome@freebsd.org Subject: Re: USE_BDB=41 and evolution / evolution-exchange X-BeenThere: freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: GNOME for FreeBSD -- porting and maintaining List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 May 2008 19:46:30 -0000 --=-V3ChPQ9AYzmW0gkiVThn Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 2008-05-05 at 23:42 -0700, Ade Lovett wrote: > Hi Folks, >=20 > Is there any particular reason both evolution and evolution-exchange =20 > hard code the berkeleydb version to 41? >=20 > I've been running it with 4.4 for quite some time now with no ill =20 > effects, so perhaps changing: >=20 > USE_BDB_VER=3D 41 >=20 > to > USE_BDB_VER=3D 41+ >=20 > in the respective Makefiles is in order? There is an issue about compatibility. That is, if one starts using 4.1, then moves to 4.4, the underlying database may not work properly as no conversion steps are taken. Historically, e-d-s always used 3.x (and internal copy). But we found we could move to 4.1, and link dynamically. If we were to relax the DB dependency, we would need confirmation that we can move from 4.1 to 4.4 safely. Joe --=20 PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc --=-V3ChPQ9AYzmW0gkiVThn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (FreeBSD) iEYEABECAAYFAkgkqhsACgkQb2iPiv4Uz4d97gCfZ8fgLJTc3tONBO4obgrbzbyn pwUAmwUFUGNXHPejqzDzcoFif/fPOljf =5+Qo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-V3ChPQ9AYzmW0gkiVThn--