tdb_chainlock() in tdb1, tdb2 and tdb_compat ?

Stefan (metze) Metzmacher metze at
Wed Apr 18 01:18:27 MDT 2012

Am 18.04.2012 09:16, schrieb Christian Ambach:
> On 04/13/2012 07:41 PM, Jeremy Allison wrote:
>>>> I think tdb2 is different enough we should really not mix tdb with
>>>> tdb2.
>>>> It would be better to rename all tdb2 apis to not clash with tdb1 and
>>>> slowly convert callers while we keep both dependencies.
>>>> Once all tdb1 callers are gone we have only tdb2 left to maintain.
>>> +1.
>> +1 from me also. Trying to mix the two is a receipe for disaster.
>> Break the API/ABI for tdb2 and have done with it - it's a separate
>> library.
> +1 from me as well.
> If TDB2 API semantics are so different from TDB1 but the function names
> are the same, this just cries for issues.


That would it also make it much easier to write a sane compat layer
using the old prototypes.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <>

More information about the samba-technical mailing list