At 3:19 AM -0700 7/16/01, Kris Kennaway wrote:
>Hmm. We could easily provide a libreadline port for ports to
>use, as long as libedit does everything that's needed for the
>in-tree users (are there any others apart from bc and gdb?)
>The only danger is if future versions of those grow the need
>to use other parts of the API which we don't implement. The
>upside is that both the FreeBSD and NetBSD communities would
>be facing the same problem, meaning greater developer power
>to implement new features.
>
>Personally, I think it's worth it to get rid of a GNU dependency
>in the base system, as well as reducing the overall amount of
>functional code duplication.
I may be misunderstanding what you mean here, but I don't think
we should replace libreadline with libedit. However, I do find
this very interesting, as some of my friends and I have a program
that we're going to switch from "gnu" to "bsd" licensing, and it
would be nice if we could use this libedit instead of libreadline.
Is there some way freebsd could switch base-system components to
use libedit, and then turn libreadline into a port for any other
ports which need libreadline? And maybe have the README for the
libreadline port just suggest to people that they might want to
try libedit instead of installing the libreadline port?
Note that part of what I want is for people who are looking for
libreadline to find out that libedit exists. I'm not sure of
the best way to do that.
--
Garance Alistair Drosehn = [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior Systems Programmer or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
