Re: postfix-3.11.4,1 does not work with lmdb-1.0.0,1, requires 0.93.5,1

Chris <[email protected]> Sat, 04 Jul 2026 18:20:55 -0700
Newsgroups	gmane.os.freebsd.devel.ports
Message-ID	<[email protected]>
On 2026-07-04 03:44, Daniel Engberg wrote:
> On 2026-07-04 11:45, Gert Doering wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> On Sat, Jul 04, 2026 at 11:40:32AM +0200, Michael Grimm wrote:
>>>> Can we get databases/lmdb reverted to 0.93.5, and 1.0.0 added as a 
>>>> separate origin?
>>> +1
>> +1 - and then depending packages can decide how they can migrate, without
>> breaking user setups when running a naive "pkg upgrade"... (POLA).
>> 
>> gert
> 
> There are two different issues here, Migration and compatibility People 
> really
> need to get rid of the "I don't want to change" mindset especially tracking
> head/master. POLA is not about that, we can't police upstream projects and 
> doing
> forks / extensive patching isn't reasonable and neither what any other 
> distro /
> package repo does. If upstream makes changes users need to follow. We can 
> apply
> POLA to projects we own but expecting that to carry out to third party is
> obviously out of our hands. What we can do is however to inform about 
> breaking
> changes and try to make the migration as painless as possible. I'm not 
> suggesting
> that we knowingly should break things just to the sake of it but on the 
> other hand
> these kind of issues have occurred before and will occur from time to time.
> Compatibility As Arch people have noted there also seems to be runtime and 
> (?)
> build issues, that however needs to be addressed. Given that time frame and
> affected ports it's likely a better idea to revert the commit and create a 
> meta PR
> for upgrading 1.x instead of having multiple versions in parallel.
> 
> What can we learn from this? Changelogs are important and to be fair one 
> could
> argue that this information wasn't easily obtainable / well communicated.
> 
> https://lists.openldap.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/thread/P347LVJF4UAA3XL7D7ITJGJI54UAARXC/
> https://www.lmdb.tech --> "Technical Information" (below download button) 
> --> More
> documentation --> "Upgrading From Release
> 0.9"http://www.lmdb.tech/doc/upgrading.html
> 
> No CI pre commit doesn't help, "exp-run"-ish requirement/checks and 
> expecting a
> committer to have access to two different releases and at least three arch's
> (amd64, aarch64 and if possible i386 (I know its being phased out)) is a bit 
> of a
> tall order, we're all humans and we can miss things. Best regards, Daniel

I don't understand the long winded defense of the way this was done. IMDB 0.9 
and 1.0
are NOT mutually incompatible. IOW they can both live on the same system 
WITHOUT
conflict. Their SO names are different. As such a port or maintainer can 
choose to
which version they wish to link against. There was little to no reason to 
make
v1.o mandatory. Kindly bring .9 back. Having done so in the first place would 
have
made for a much quieter and uneventful transition.

Thank you. :)

--Chris
0xE512722F.asc (application/pgp-keys, 3 KB)