[Pkg-openldap-devel] Bug#651700: Bug#651700: slapd: BDB library version mismatch
vorlon at debian.org
Thu Jan 5 01:38:53 UTC 2012
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 01:35:50PM -0800, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> OpenLDAP was compiled using 5.1.25, and the libs were updated to
> 5.1.29. OpenLDAP *must* be recompiled against 5.1.29 as well in that
> case. If that is done, then everything will move along happily.
> This is by design because Oracle/Sleepycat has made API changes in
> patch level releases before. back-hdb/bdb *must* be compiled
> against the exact BDB library version they are linked to. In this
> case, the patch level does matter.
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 01:58:13PM -0800, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> --On Monday, December 12, 2011 10:54 PM +0100 Julien Cristau
> <jcristau at debian.org> wrote:
> >If bdb breaks ABI then it needs to bump SONAME. If it doesn't then
> >apps compiled against an earlier version must still work. A check for
> >the patchlevel version is just broken.
> Feel free to take that up with Oracle. ;) Until they fix their
> development practices, the OpenLDAP behavior remains.
Under the circumstances that seems a perfectly reasonable behavior for
upstream to implement, but in Debian we hold libraries to a higher standard.
If the library *does* change its ABI, the package name in Debian will
change even if upstream fails to handle this, so the check within OpenLDAP
is redundant; and in cases where Oracle releases a patchlevel release that
doesn't change the ABI, this actively works against the packaging system.
So I think the correct course of action here is to patch this check out of
the Debian package.
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/
slangasek at ubuntu.com vorlon at debian.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 828 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the Pkg-openldap-devel