Hello,
slapd checks the exact version of BDB at runtime and fails if it doesn't equal to the version that it's been linked against. Is there a reason for such precise check? Shouldn't the major and minor version numbers be enough?
The code seems to have been there for a while, so I'm sorry if such question has been asked before. I couldn't find any answers.
Thank you,
Jan Synacek wrote:
Hello,
slapd checks the exact version of BDB at runtime and fails if it doesn't equal to the version that it's been linked against. Is there a reason for such precise check? Shouldn't the major and minor version numbers be enough?
The code seems to have been there for a while, so I'm sorry if such question has been asked before. I couldn't find any answers.
No, our previous experience has been that just the major and minor version numbers are not enough. APIs changed quite a bit between the earliest versions of a release and later versions. (E.g., 4.1.1 vs 4.1.25, etc.) Check the DB_VERSION ifdefs in the code and you'll see.
On 10/16/2013 02:24 PM, Howard Chu wrote:
Jan Synacek wrote:
Hello,
slapd checks the exact version of BDB at runtime and fails if it doesn't equal to the version that it's been linked against. Is there a reason for such precise check? Shouldn't the major and minor version numbers be enough?
The code seems to have been there for a while, so I'm sorry if such question has been asked before. I couldn't find any answers.
No, our previous experience has been that just the major and minor version numbers are not enough. APIs changed quite a bit between the earliest versions of a release and later versions. (E.g., 4.1.1 vs 4.1.25, etc.) Check the DB_VERSION ifdefs in the code and you'll see.
Well, so libdb doesn't respect the versioning scheme that the other libraries do...
Thanks for the response, Howard!
openldap-technical@openldap.org
-
Howard Chu -
Jan Synacek