> .... given the issues with BDB. Is it worth embedding a copy of > BDB into the Cyrus distribution rather than using the OS one? I > know it's generally considered bad taste, but it sure makes > keeping in sync easier! IMHO, yes, most certainly. Cyrus is a large and complex system, and its maintenance would automatically become much simpler if it reduced its dependencies on other OS-specific libraries, but carried its own. OpenOffice (on my Ubuntu 9.04 laptop) has 265 .so files in its /usr/lib/openoffice/basis3.1/program directory. How many of these are exclusive to OpenOffice and how many are private versions of non-OOo libraries? (I tried verifying, but could not arrive at a clear picture.) Firefox and Thunderbird both use SQLite, AFAIK. Does anyone care whether the version of SQLite used by my Ubuntu-bundled Firefox is exactly identical to the latest version of SQLite bundled by the Ubuntu distro? I'm open to criticism, but I strongly feel Cyrus should carry its own version of some of these critical system libraries, specially those ones which have caused so much compatibility grief in its history. I know this is considered 'bad taste', but the sysadmin who just wants a stable Cyrus server probably cares less about taste than stability. BTW, a basic question: why do we face more problems with Berkeley DB than with other file formats? Shuvam ---- Cyrus Home Page: http://www.cyrusimap.org/ List Archives/Info: http://lists.andrew.cmu.edu/pipermail/info-cyrus/
