Re: Bug report(s) (fwd)

[Dean Gaudet <dg...@arctic.org>]

There wasn't any PR# for this one ... but maybe it's a faq.

Dean

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 13:53:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Birnbaum <da...@chelsea.net>
To: Dean Gaudet <dg...@arctic.org>
Cc: David Birnbaum <da...@flatiron.org>, new-httpd@apache.org
Subject: Re: Bug report(s) (fwd)

Dean,

Just to let you know that -lc -ldb fixes the problem.  You might want to
have somebody put a note into the docs somewhere to that effect.

Thanks,

David.

On Fri, 1 Aug 1997, Dean Gaudet wrote:

> Dunno if solaris' ld will generate a map file for you, check the man page. 
> You might also be able to get filename/symbol mapping info out of a
> debugging version of httpd using nm.  You could just run nm on the libdb
> and see what symbols it defines.  I'm guessing it defines the dbm symbols
> as wrappers for db functions.  You can probably work around it by putting
> "-lc -ldb" into EXTRA_LDFLAGS.  Or perhaps you have to specify "-lndbm
> -ldb" or something like that. 
> 
> Dean
> 
> On Fri, 1 Aug 1997, David Birnbaum wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 1 Aug 1997, Dean Gaudet wrote:
> > 
> > > This is probably because libdb provides functions which override the dbm
> > > functions in libc.  That is an issue that you'll have to resolve on your
> > > own.  Perhaps you've upgraded libdb between building 1.1.x and building
> > > 1.2.x?  It's certainly possible to have _dbm and _db reside together ... 
> > > they don't clobber each other at all. 
> > 
> > Hmmm....I'm not sure how libdb functions would override dbm functionality
> > in libc - but that was my point exactly.  Why would the AuthDBMUserFile
> > command cause an open to a db file?  Is it possible that there is some
> > sort of namespace collision within the mod_auth code that inserts the
> > wrong callback?  It doesn't look like there is any problem with libc and
> > libdb - all of the dbm routines have names like "dbm_*", whereas the db
> > routines start with "db".
> > 
> > I have a pretty generic configuration (Solaris 2.5.1, db 1.85), but
> > perhaps nobody else tries to do this.  In any case, I have been unable to
> > get these working together since 1.1.1, when I first built httpd, and can
> > be replicated at will. 
> > 
> > Pointers on how to ferret this out would be appreciated.
> > 
> > David.
> > 
> > 
> 
>