On Sat, May 22, 2004 at 12:31:25PM +1000, grant beattie wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 21, 2004 at 11:41:29PM +0000, Johnny C. Lam wrote:
> 
> > bdb.buildlink3.mk is set up to try using, in order: native BDB, db4,
> > db3, then db2, so if there is no native BDB implementation, it should
> > be falling through to using db4.
> 
> may I ask why db4, db3 and db2 are used in that order of preference?
> 
> db4 and db3 are quite bloated, and I would have expected db2 to be the
> more obvious choice for a default.

Well, "bloat" is in the eye of the beholder, and personally, I think
if you have perl installed on your system, then objecting to db4 vs.
db2 is pretty insignificant.  Seriously though, db4 can satisfy almost
all db[123] dependencies via the db_compat interface, and avoids having
to install db4 later on when some package like apr needs it.  For this
reason, "db4 db3 db2" seemed like a reasonable ordering.

I'm not wedded to this, so if you'd like to change this and there are
no serious objections, please feel free.

	Cheers,

	-- Johnny Lam <jlam@NetBSD.org>