From: Nathan K. <na...@ve...> - 2004-04-26 20:37:27
|
> > I fixed something similar in the CVS version (Danger! Don't go > > there!). > > Already done :-) but only on pose, it's not dangerous (except maybe > for my mental health?). Yes, mostly I mean for your mental health. When I came to this project a few months ago, I found that the previous maintainers had disappeared*, and that the CVS was left in an uncompileable state. Thinking that the CVS code probably represented the most current code, I set off getting it into working order. Now several months later, I'm realizing that it represents an incomplete early branch with lots of untested code, and that the 1.1.0 release was maintained and developed outside of CVS! Frankly, I find this disgusting. Essentially, I've wasted my time and that of many others by having them test the CVS version, which now works reasonably well under Pose (which I have access to) but still fails miserably on most real modern machines (which I don't currently have access to). AVOID THE CVS VERSION UNTIL 1.1.0 BECOMES THE NEW HEAD! > > If possible, it would be great to see if you can reproduce > > this bug with a stock binary release. There are a number of > > If you refer to db-1.2.0-alpha5.prc then it's mostly the same. It > crashes at the same point, but with a different message: No, 1.2.0 alpha series is based on the CVS code, which I'm suggesting you avoid spending time on. I was hoping you could try it a precompiled 1.1.0 binary and see if you can reproduce the problem. Otherwise, I fear it may have to do with the particular choice of compile options which you (and I, as the compiler of the alpha) chose. --nate * - Marc has just lately resurfaced, at least partially, and his comments have helped me understand the role of the CVS code. |