tdb_chainlock() in tdb1, tdb2 and tdb_compat ?

[simo]

On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 20:57 +0930, Rusty Russell wrote: 
> On Thu, 10 May 2012 08:35:07 -0400, simo <idra at samba.org> wrote:
> > Rusty,
> > it is a big change for external users of tdb.
> > Distributions ship tdb1 as a standalone library. If you force only tdb2
> > and at the same time you do not rename all the symbols and force API
> > changes you are putting distributions between a rock and a hard place.
> 
> No, that's what library major versions are for.

Only when all the code links to one version, this is not the case.

> > I really think we should change API signatures so tdb1 and tdb2 (or
> > whatever we want to call it) can be installed side by side for a while
> > until all users decide to abandon tdb1 and we can kill it.
> 
> Of course they can be installed side by side: that's why the headers
> have different names.

Except ldb links with tdb, and I have at least one application that used
ldb and also directly uses tdb, this would break.

Simo.

-- 
Simo Sorce
Samba Team GPL Compliance Officer <simo at samba.org>
Principal Software Engineer at Red Hat, Inc. <simo at redhat.com>