status and a new snapshot release?

[David Relson]

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 03:57:38 +0100
Matthias Andree wrote:

> David,
> 
> we've fixed some bugs (not all that we know though, Evgeniy's
> performance killer is around, RFC-2047 is still recursive, we have no
> _decent_ backup script or recovery documentation), polished some
> documentation since 0.93.1 and added/fixed convenience scripts and
> helper features to aid BDB upgrades.
> 
> We're nearing three weeks since 0.93.1, how about 0.93.2 as interim
> release to share the fixes we already have with our users? 0.93.2
> wouldn't yet be ready to become the next stable release, but a little
> step forward at any rate.
> 
> The input for the earlier 0.93.X versions has proved valuable, and
> ideas for further work is adding backup helpers to bogoutil around the
> sample in BerkeleyDB.4.2/docs/ref/transapp/archival.html, perhaps use
> db_archive functionality to gather databases for semi-automatic
> resizing, and we can know where else the shoe pinches with current
> releases, and if anyone still has BDB 3.0 in use... - particularly
> multiple wordlists may be a sore spot; perhaps we could run coverage
> analysis and add some self-checks for newer code.
> 
> The current state of CVS compiles fine and passes all self-checks on
> SuSE Linux 9.1 i586 with DB 3.1 to 4.3; DB 3.1 and 4.2 with
> transactions disabled, QDBM, TDB; FreeBSD 4.10 i386 with DB 4.1 and
> 4.2 (I didn't bother to test other versions, the machine is a lowly
> AMD K6-2/300) and Solaris 8/SPARC64 with DB 3.3 and 4.1, 32 and 64 bit
> (also some older gear, UltraIIi/400).
> 
> Looking forward to your reply,

Let's give it a few days more.  I'd like to experiment with Evgeny's
problem and we may see additional issues worthy of fixing.  OK?

David