Re: [Evolution] db3

["Sergey V. Udaltsov" <sergey oudaltsov clients ie>]

> You know, you're of course free to do whatever you want in regards to
:)) Thanks
> db3, but my question is:  Why do you insist on using 3.2.9 for evolution
> rather than 3.1.17?  If 3.1.17 is built statically into evolution, why
> do you insist on using something else?  What will 3.2.9 (presumably
> built and linked dynamically?) in evolution get you that you don't
> already have?
I do not insist on 3.2.9. I just would like to be able to use any
version of db3 (3.3.x, 3.4.x) redhat is shipping with its OSes. Without
spending extra N megs for 3.1.17. Since I always build evo myself (every
version), I have to have 3.1.17 installed all the time (/opt/db3...).
BTW, should I really explain what are the disadvantages of static
linking?
Again, there is nothing here about insisting. I am really grateful to
Ximian for its wonderful product and all its functionality. I just
thought it is very small issue. I was wrong:)

Cheers,

Sergey