You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Marc Slemko <ma...@worldgate.com> on 1998/03/17 23:40:01 UTC
why are we setting DB_LIB?
We set:
DBM_LIB="-ldbm"
DB_LIB="-ldb"
in Configuration. This means that if we are on a system that doesn't need
-ldb (for example) yet we don't explicitly say that in Configure, then it
will die because it will assume it is needed so find-dbm-libs will use
-ldb when compiling to see if it needs -ldb. Don't make sense to me...
Re: why are we setting DB_LIB?
Posted by Ben Laurie <be...@algroup.co.uk>.
Marc Slemko wrote:
>
> Although I don't know what to do about ndbm stuff. ie. you need a
> different include file, plus possible other mess.
>
> Grr. This whole db junk is a mess. How much would people object to
> having one db module for dbm, db, ndbm, etc? It wouldn't be too hard to
> make a single *db* module that used whichever was found, but then people
> wouldn't have multiple modules if they want to use both.
In the unlikely event that someone wants both, they can work out how to
do it for themselves (cp mod_db.c mod_db2.c, emacs mod_db2.c Configure,
wash, rinse, repeat).
> Sheesh. One of the stories just on the hourly news on the radio here was
> about sendmail adding antispam features and they were saying all spam
> would be gone.
Hashcash. You know it makes sense.
Cheers,
Ben.
--
Ben Laurie |Phone: +44 (181) 735 0686| Apache Group member
Freelance Consultant |Fax: +44 (181) 735 0689|http://www.apache.org
and Technical Director|Email: ben@algroup.co.uk |
A.L. Digital Ltd, |Apache-SSL author http://www.apache-ssl.org/
London, England. |"Apache: TDG" http://www.ora.com/catalog/apache
Re: why are we setting DB_LIB?
Posted by Marc Slemko <ma...@worldgate.com>.
Although I don't know what to do about ndbm stuff. ie. you need a
different include file, plus possible other mess.
Grr. This whole db junk is a mess. How much would people object to
having one db module for dbm, db, ndbm, etc? It wouldn't be too hard to
make a single *db* module that used whichever was found, but then people
wouldn't have multiple modules if they want to use both.
Sheesh. One of the stories just on the hourly news on the radio here was
about sendmail adding antispam features and they were saying all spam
would be gone.
On Tue, 17 Mar 1998, Dean Gaudet wrote:
> I dunno, go for it is what I'd say.
>
> Dean
>
> On Tue, 17 Mar 1998, Marc Slemko wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 17 Mar 1998, Dean Gaudet wrote:
> >
> > > Yup it doesn't make sense, and when I did the linux specific stuff for db
> > > libs I assumed other people would do similar things for other platforms.
> > > Maybe then it'd make sense.
> >
> > Why not just have it try without any, if that works cool, otherwise try
> > adding it to see if it works. If it still doesn't work, abort.
> >
> > Doesn't that work on every platform, period? Well, except ones that
> > define dumb stub functions or something.
> >
> > >
> > > Dean
> > >
> > > On Tue, 17 Mar 1998, Marc Slemko wrote:
> > >
> > > > We set:
> > > >
> > > > DBM_LIB="-ldbm"
> > > > DB_LIB="-ldb"
> > > >
> > > > in Configuration. This means that if we are on a system that doesn't need
> > > > -ldb (for example) yet we don't explicitly say that in Configure, then it
> > > > will die because it will assume it is needed so find-dbm-libs will use
> > > > -ldb when compiling to see if it needs -ldb. Don't make sense to me...
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
Re: why are we setting DB_LIB?
Posted by Dean Gaudet <dg...@arctic.org>.
I dunno, go for it is what I'd say.
Dean
On Tue, 17 Mar 1998, Marc Slemko wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Mar 1998, Dean Gaudet wrote:
>
> > Yup it doesn't make sense, and when I did the linux specific stuff for db
> > libs I assumed other people would do similar things for other platforms.
> > Maybe then it'd make sense.
>
> Why not just have it try without any, if that works cool, otherwise try
> adding it to see if it works. If it still doesn't work, abort.
>
> Doesn't that work on every platform, period? Well, except ones that
> define dumb stub functions or something.
>
> >
> > Dean
> >
> > On Tue, 17 Mar 1998, Marc Slemko wrote:
> >
> > > We set:
> > >
> > > DBM_LIB="-ldbm"
> > > DB_LIB="-ldb"
> > >
> > > in Configuration. This means that if we are on a system that doesn't need
> > > -ldb (for example) yet we don't explicitly say that in Configure, then it
> > > will die because it will assume it is needed so find-dbm-libs will use
> > > -ldb when compiling to see if it needs -ldb. Don't make sense to me...
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
Re: why are we setting DB_LIB?
Posted by Marc Slemko <ma...@worldgate.com>.
On Tue, 17 Mar 1998, Dean Gaudet wrote:
> Yup it doesn't make sense, and when I did the linux specific stuff for db
> libs I assumed other people would do similar things for other platforms.
> Maybe then it'd make sense.
Why not just have it try without any, if that works cool, otherwise try
adding it to see if it works. If it still doesn't work, abort.
Doesn't that work on every platform, period? Well, except ones that
define dumb stub functions or something.
>
> Dean
>
> On Tue, 17 Mar 1998, Marc Slemko wrote:
>
> > We set:
> >
> > DBM_LIB="-ldbm"
> > DB_LIB="-ldb"
> >
> > in Configuration. This means that if we are on a system that doesn't need
> > -ldb (for example) yet we don't explicitly say that in Configure, then it
> > will die because it will assume it is needed so find-dbm-libs will use
> > -ldb when compiling to see if it needs -ldb. Don't make sense to me...
> >
> >
>
Re: why are we setting DB_LIB?
Posted by Dean Gaudet <dg...@arctic.org>.
Yup it doesn't make sense, and when I did the linux specific stuff for db
libs I assumed other people would do similar things for other platforms.
Maybe then it'd make sense.
Dean
On Tue, 17 Mar 1998, Marc Slemko wrote:
> We set:
>
> DBM_LIB="-ldbm"
> DB_LIB="-ldb"
>
> in Configuration. This means that if we are on a system that doesn't need
> -ldb (for example) yet we don't explicitly say that in Configure, then it
> will die because it will assume it is needed so find-dbm-libs will use
> -ldb when compiling to see if it needs -ldb. Don't make sense to me...
>
>