From: Conrad P. <co...@me...> - 2006-12-15 02:10:18
|
(cc'd to sweep-devel) On 15/12/06, Jack Browning <moj...@ch...> wrote: > FWIW, I just learned today that the Gentoo devs have, at least for > people who use both Sweep and Samba, dumped Sweep in favor of Samba. > > The gory details are here: > > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=148001 > > Evidently, Sweep's tdb cannot co-exist with Samba's. Hi, thanks for the link. Comment #5 in that bug report (probably posted after you mailed me) mentions that sweep does not depend on the installed libtdb. Sweep bundles its own copy of tdb, along with a script to update that from Samba SVN if desired. Earlier versions of sweep depended on an installed tdb. I notice that this isn't abundantly clear on Sweep's web site. cheers, Conrad. |
From: <rad...@ko...> - 2007-01-12 12:32:00
|
MjAwNi8xMi8xNSwgQ29ucmFkIFBhcmtlciA8Y29ucmFkQG1ldGFkZWNrcy5vcmc+Ogo+IENvbW1l bnQgIzUgaW4gdGhhdCBidWcgcmVwb3J0IChwcm9iYWJseSBwb3N0ZWQgYWZ0ZXIgeW91IG1haWxl ZCBtZSkKPiBtZW50aW9ucyB0aGF0IHN3ZWVwIGRvZXMgbm90IGRlcGVuZCBvbiB0aGUgaW5zdGFs bGVkIGxpYnRkYi4gU3dlZXAKPiBidW5kbGVzIGl0cyBvd24gY29weSBvZiB0ZGIsIGFsb25nIHdp dGggYSBzY3JpcHQgdG8gdXBkYXRlIHRoYXQgZnJvbQo+IFNhbWJhIFNWTiBpZiBkZXNpcmVkLiBF YXJsaWVyIHZlcnNpb25zIG9mIHN3ZWVwIGRlcGVuZGVkIG9uIGFuCj4gaW5zdGFsbGVkIHRkYi4K U28sIG1heWJlIHdlIHNob3VsZCByaXAgc3VwcG9ydCBmb3IgdGRiIGluIGNhc2Ugb2YgR0NvbmY/ CkkgZG9uJ3Qga25vdyBpZiBpdCB3aWxsIGJlIGVhc3kgb3Igbm90IGJ1dCBpdCBpcyBhdmFpbGFi bGUgYXMgZXh0ZXJuYWwKbGlicmFyeSBhbmQgcHJlc2VudCBpbiBtb3N0IChvciBhbGwpIHJlY2Vu dCBMaW51eCBkaXN0cmlidXRpb25zIGFuZApvdGhlciBVbml4ZXMuCgpXaGF0IGRvIFlvdSB0aGlu az8KCmNoZWVycwotLSAKUmFkb3PFgmF3IEtvcnplbmlld3NraQpyYWRvc2xhd0Brb3J6ZW5pZXdz a2kubmV0Cg== |
From: pete <zen...@ze...> - 2007-01-14 16:42:43
|
On Fri, 2007-01-12 at 13:31 +0100, Rados=C5=82aw Korzeniewski wrote: > 2006/12/15, Conrad Parker <co...@me...>: > > Comment #5 in that bug report (probably posted after you mailed me) > > mentions that sweep does not depend on the installed libtdb. Sweep > > bundles its own copy of tdb, along with a script to update that from > > Samba SVN if desired. Earlier versions of sweep depended on an > > installed tdb. > So, maybe we should rip support for tdb in case of GConf? > I don't know if it will be easy or not but it is available as external > library and present in most (or all) recent Linux distributions and > other Unixes. well, sweep was removed from gentoo in error as sweep doesn't depend on libtdb in any traditional sense. (it includes the source and links to the library statically) so there's no practical *need* to do it. the only reason i'd be tempted is because it enables us to have headless options. (options that have no interface controls) users tend to get all angrified when faced with those as they need to break open gconf-editor and hunt around the tree to find the app tree though.=20 personally, i think i'd stick with tdb for now. we have enough features to implement without starting to reimplement existing ones. if anyone has more compelling reasons to switch to Gconf that my idiot brain didn't come up with then make some noise.=20 pete. |