On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 8:29 PM Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The lack of a good backup tool for Berkeley DB earned me nearly a year > of contracting salary from the BBC to keep alive an obsolete Berkeley > DB and Apache 1.3 on RHEL systems long after httpd 2.x was released. > It was discarded by Subversion with good cause. > > Why does XEmacs need to preserve a database? It may not. XEmacs provides a generic "database" interface in Emacs Lisp. The underlying database can be libdb, gdbm, ndbm, and probably something else I've forgotten. XEmacs itself only uses that interface to keep a Unicode code point database. That is easily recreated. The problem is that I have no way of knowing what people have done with the Lisp interface, what databases they may have created. It is entirely possible that 0 people will be impacted if I change the builds to use gdbm instead. It is also possible that I will get lots of bugs filed by angry people who can't access their databases anymore. I have no way to tell (without actually doing it and seeing how many bugs get filed, of course). > Is there anything that couldn't expect a rebuild as part an OS > release? Anything that people actually use, besides XEmacs? Sorry, I'm not catching your meaning here. -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.org/ _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
