Looking to once again re-bundle LDB

[Andrew Bartlett]

Just a heads up that I'm still keen to reduce the burden of an LDB
release at Samba security release time.

The rough consensus at the end of 
https://gitlab.com/samba-team/samba/-/merge_requests/374 seems to be to
make ldb:
 - for public consumers behave like any other Samba public library (eg
libwbclient), by removing the independent tarball and build system.
 - for Samba builds by default, to install ldb as a private library. 

The version numbers would remain, but could then diverge between ldb
and pyldb-util for example (they would no longer be the tarball number,
so would move just like other SO numbers do).

We would change the ldb modules dir to have the version string in it,
so that modules are not installed for the wrong version.

My current motivation comes from working on a pyldb change that would
change pyldb-util, but also a long-running desire to make this simpler.

Debian currently has this patch: 
https://sources.debian.org/src/samba/2%3A4.19.3%2Bdfsg-1/debian/patches/Force-LDB-as-standalone.patch/

This makes Samba public libldb as a public library, but from the main
Samba build, so that the ldb build system is no longer used.

Andrew Bartlett


-- 
Andrew Bartlett (he/him)       https://samba.org/~abartlet/Samba Team Member (since 2001) https://samba.orgSamba Team Lead                https://catalyst.net.nz/services/sambaCatalyst.Net Ltd
Proudly developing Samba for Catalyst.Net Ltd - a Catalyst IT group
company
Samba Development and Support: https://catalyst.net.nz/services/samba
Catalyst IT - Expert Open Source Solutions