Hi Phil and all.
On Tue, Nov 14, 2000 at 08:57:28AM -0800, Phil Nelson wrote:
Well, I think I have to care on my own for the truth about this topic and ask the FSF for details.
I happen to be the author of gdbm. Jason Downs (downsj@downsj.com) is the current maintainer. He hasn't done much since 1999, but here is the last ChangeLog entry:
[...]
Now, it is certainly true that Berkeley DB has more features and works cross platform better than gdbm. There is no question there. But there is still a maintainer for gdbm and there has been a recent release. (May 1999.)
Thank you Phil. So I am sorry for this topic. I trusted the documentaton of my distribution. Ok, I maintain Gnu DBM - Unit furthermore.
Eike
So I am sorry for this topic. I trusted the documentaton of my distribution.
Not a problem. I just like to correct bad information when I see it. It is not your problem you trusted the documentation.
Ok, I maintain Gnu DBM - Unit furthermore.
I wasn't requesting that you continue to maintain it, but hopefully it won't take much time. Many people still use gdbm. My major point was that gdbm is still being maintained.
One thing furthur I should point out, in defense of the Debian documenters ... gdbm is no longer the "dbm" used by glibc. I believe it is Berkeley db. It would be easy to extend this to say that gdbm is not being maintained. (Which of course, is not true.)
-
Eike Lange -
Phil Nelson