tir, 2003-03-25 kl. 12:45 skrev Nico Erfurth:
> > The strange thing is, that my exim 4.14 binary (Linux, gcc 3.0.4, glibc
> > 2.2.4-24), compiled after compiling and installing Openssl 0.9.7a, is
> > using two different (and possibly conflicting) Openssl libcrypto
> > versions. I don't dare to remove 0.9.6b for fear of breaking standard RH
> > 7.2 stuff.
Turns out it's using 2 different libssl versions at the same time, too.
Curiouser and curiouser.
> OpenSSL and BDB are the only libs I don't like to compile myself,
> because of the changing APIs all the time, they like to break things :)
> You like to play with the fire, don't you? ;)
Because, just as with Exim, I keep up to date with Openldap, I "have to"
use BDB 4.1.25. Openldap 2.1.16 is a rip-snorter and has much stuff,
speed and bug fixes that no earlier versions have.
I have the following BDB stuff *active* on my compile machine:
db.h -> db.h.bdb4.1
db.h.bdb3 -> db3/db.h
db.h.bdb4.0 -> /usr/local/BerkeleyDB.4.0/include/db.h
db.h.bdb4.1 -> /usr/local/BerkeleyDB.4.1/include/db.h
I.e., my standard db.h is for BDB 4.1 and that's what I told exim 4.14
to use, just to see whether exim swallowed it without throwing up.
But no, exim uses 3.3. I don't mind, my mail server works bootifully,
but why all the above holy mix up with ssl and BDB? I'm not a C
programmer and don't want to start going through reams of make code to
find out why.
I seem to remember that my earlier exims /did/ use 4.0, when that was my
Openldap BDB.
Does anyone know why exim chooses what it does, headers and libraries?
Best,
Tony
--
Tony Earnshaw
e-post: tonni@???
www: http://www.billy.demon.nl
