Hello Igor,
Sorry for the delay.
Igor Raits <ignatenkobrain(a)fedoraproject.org> writes:
On Mon, 2020-06-15 at 16:10 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
>
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NSSDBMRemoval
>
> == Summary ==
> Network Security Services (NSS) historically supports 2 different
> database backends, based on SQLite and dbm. Since Fedora 28, the
> SQLite backend has been used by default and the dbm backend has been
> deprecated ([[Changes/NSSDefaultFileFormatSql|NSS Default File Format
> SQL]]). This Change is about removing the support for the dbm backend
> entirely.
>
> == Owner ==
> * Name: [[User:ueno| Daiki Ueno]]
> * Email: dueno(a)redhat.com
>
> == Detailed Description ==
> Applications that use the NSS library often use a database for
> storage
> of keys, certificates and trust. NSS supports two different storage
> formats, one is based on SQLite and another one is based on dbm
> files.
>
> Today's default file format used by NSS, used when applications omit
> the type parameter, is the SQLite file format, and the older dbm
> format has been considered as deprecated since Fedora 28, because it
> has several drawbacks such as lack of support for parallel access to
> the storage.
>
> As the default change was made 2 years ago, and NSS provides a
> transparent migration mechanism from the dbm format to the SQLite
> format, the suggestion is to completely disable the dbm backend.
>
> == Benefit to Fedora ==
> There are a few benefits:
> * By disabling the dbm database, the size of the library binary will
> be slightly smaller
> * The NSS developers will be able to focus on the new file format
>
> == Scope ==
> * Proposal owners:
> A build time environment variable (NSS_DISABLE_DBM) needs to be set.
>
> * Other developers: N/A
> * Policies and guidelines: N/A (not a System Wide Change)
> * Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)
>
> == Upgrade/compatibility impact ==
> The impact should be limited, as long as the users always update from
> the previous version. That would ensure the existing databases on the
> system are properly migrated. Therefore, we propose this as a Self
> Contained Change, rather than a System Wide Change.
Does it mean that people who upgrade from F31 to F33 will work just
fine?
That should, as long as the NSS databases had been created or accessed
with the default method (that is SQLite) on F31. On the other hand, if
a database is created explicitly as dbm, it needs to be converted before
upgrading to F33.
If it is too worrisome, I'm willing to provide a script that checks if
the databases on the known locations are already converted.
Regards,
--
Daiki Ueno