LDB releases

[Andrew Bartlett]

On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 15:08 -0400, simo wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-03-27 at 21:39 +0200, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> > Hi Simo, Tridge,
> > 
> > For two reasons, I think it would be nice to have releases of LDB
> > (standalone) with version numbers out of sync with Samba 4.
> > 
> > 1) At the moment, LDB has been packaged in Debian as part of Samba 4.
> > This has a few consequences:
> > 
> >  * Follows Samba 4 versioning (4.0.0~tp3), so no API guarantees per
> >    version
> >  * Tied to the samba source package in other ways (can't enter 
> >    the same distribution as samba)
> >  * Lots of dependencies on other Samba packages because of the modules
> >    provided.
> > 
> > I think the ldb Debian package should be based on the standalone ldb (i.e. with
> > dependencies on just tdb and talloc) and not be packaged as part of Samba 4. 
> > That would significantly reduce the number of dependencies and would make
> > it possible for ldb to enter Debian Sid and eventually testing and not just 
> > experimental.
> > 
> > 2) Ideally, I also think it would be nice if ldb ended up in the same
> > situation as popt is at the moment, where we can use 
> > library provided by the system (if the version is recent enough), or, if not 
> > available, the one provided with Samba.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > However, both of these situations require there to be ldb releases
> > with version numbers of some sort. Would it be possible to have a version 
> > number somewhere (I guess configure.ac would do), that is updated when 
> > API-incompatible changes are introduced, new features are introduced, etc?
> > 
> > Eventually, it would also be nice to have tarballs of these 
> > releases on the site so they can be used by other developers that are 
> > interested in using ldb in their software.
> > 
> > Thoughts?
> 
> I agree with all this, I think we already had talks about doing that.
> The only problem I see yet is that we actually depend on samba specific
> features introduced at build time.
> 
> We should be able to modularize them so that we can load them at run
> time or we will never be able to use our ldb libraries as compiled
> outside of the samba tree.
> 
> Do you have any idea on how to solve this problem?

Perhaps we split it out, then deal with it later?  That is, for now ldb
will 'always' be 'missing' or 'too old' despite being installed on the
host system.

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett                                http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team           http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Red Hat Inc.                  http://redhat.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20070329/418e24c4/attachment.bin