Safe to use bogofilter over NFS?

[Matthias Andree]

Glenn Morris <gmorris+bf at ast.cam.ac.uk> writes:

> Matthias Andree wrote:
>
>> It is not "make check" that is different, but versions 0.93.0 and
>> newer are different from 0.92.8, as is detailed in the
>> RELEASE.NOTES. I may need to add a note about NFS.
>
> I think such a note would be helpful. Also a comment in the relevant
> section of the FAQ; since it basically gives wrong information now.

Well, 0.93.X is labeled "current". David's call if we want to have that
information in yet. The RELEASE.NOTES file in CVS has been updated.

> Please consider this another request for a configuration option to
> disable the transaction feature. It's a feature I have no need for
> (it's easy to restore the wordlist from backup, or regenerate it); and
> as it stands it prevents me from using new versions of bogofilter at
> all (though I guess I could look at the alternative --with-database
> options).

We may be able to revive the old BDB code under a different name,
--with-database=old-bdb or something. I'd like to shelve this until the
other open issues (scope of transactions, for instance) are fixed in the
current BDB code, so as to have wider testing.

I'd think we should hold back the "stable" tag for any 0.93.X until this
issue and the observed performance issues are completely settled.

I might vote for dropping the -u option though.

Most of the new incompatibilities, fixes and features in 0.93.X pertain
to the databases; for production use, the "stable" 0.92.8 is still fine,
recommended and supported in cases where 0.93.X causes trouble.

-- 
Matthias Andree