On Jan 27, 2008, at 3:03 PM, Peter Kalbus wrote:

> you're right, the --with-db=no seems to produce a lot of errors.
>
> but, how can i prevent people from building db based systems?
>

Dunno. Users like choice ...

> if they can, they will do and if it fails, nobody will ask, but  
> will say, that rpm5 has a bug on qnx.
> i don't like those lines. so, i'd like to get a solution, which
>
>   - either is worlig with db support

db-4.7 (or reverting to last known working on QNX) are the easiest
pathways. DB_PRIVATE is viable, SuSE uses DB_PRIVATE
in "production" (but there is definite feature reversion with
using a global shared/exclusive lock and I'm not interested
in going backwards in rpm-5.0).

>   - or preventing from using it, as much as possible
>

Preventing is not as good as supplying the reasons so
that users can make informed choices.

> will the below mentioned change set any default to sqlite3?

Changing the 3 to 4 in the 2 macros will use sqlite3.

> can anyone switch back to berkeley db from the command line?

There are db conversion issues, so its not like one can just flip
between bdb <-> sqlite3. But yes, macros can be set from the command  
line.

> what about an existing berkeley db database and the rpm5 version?
>

If you have a rpmdb in Berkeley DB format, you kinda need a
Berkely DB implementation to read. That's true for Oracle, postgres,
sqlite3, etc etc as well.

73 de Jeff