Is there some good reason for taking gdbm out of python build?

[Paul Ackersviller <pda%sdf.org@localhost>]

On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 06:48:59PM +0000, Paul Ackersviller wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 09:13:23AM +0100, Jonathan Perkin wrote:
...
> > Right, I had a horrid time trying to get any recent-ish version of
> > Python building on HP/UX a few years ago, and had to settle on running
> > an older 2.5 and modifying our code to support that.
> > 
> > Great if a newer version helps, though.
> 
> Unfortunately I spoke to soon on this.  Python's build has the annoying
> habit of a successful exit status even when many of the critical modules
> didn't compile.  None of this is pkgsrc's problem as far as I can tell.
> 
> I'm wondering if, in the meantime, there might be ways for pkgsrc to
> have fewer dependencies on python.  Anyone have pointers for this?

Replying to myself, since nobody else has... python 2.7.5 on HP-UX 11.31
does look to be in a reasonably good state after all.  However I'm building
for 64 bits, and the OS doesn't seem to come with a 64-bit libndbm, while
lang/python27/Makefile is specifying --with-dbmliborder=ndbm:bdb, i.e.
it's eliminating gdbm from the default dbmliborder for python.  Building
via --with-dbmliborder=gdbm:bdb after libgdbm solves my immediate problem,
allowing xcb-proto, libxcb, etc. to compile now.