On 27.09.2010 19:17, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 03:06:27 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
2.6 used 4.8. an option would be a backport of the 2.6 module
including the patches to the 2.5 package; such a patch should only
be applied after 2.6 is the default.
I tried to do this, came up with the attached patches. The build log is
at http://people.debian.org/~jcristau/python2.5-db4.8.log and shows
errors from test_bsddb3 (specifically Lib/bsddb/test/test_thread.py) in
some of the runs. Not sure where to go from there. Looking at buildd
logs, either the python2.6 builds nor those from python-bsddb3 seem to
run those tests, so I don't have anything to compare this to.
please check this at least on sparc, maybe asking the sparc port maintainers for
assistance? that was the platform with most of the troubles.
Basically I copied the bsddb module from the python2.6 source package,
applied a few changes to fix syntax errors from python2.5, and then
added the bsddb-version patch from python2.6.
the approach is ok.
Would it be better to use the python-bsddb3 package as source? Should I
have copied the newer bsddb module but kept the old tests?
no. in python2.x the module is part of the standard library. don't offer
anything newer than in the default python version.
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
