On Jan 18, 2006, at 1:31 AM, Anthony Baxter wrote: > On Wednesday 18 January 2006 16:25, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: >> Unless rms has changed his position on this, or there has been >> relevant legislation or a court decision in the meantime, >> explicitly requiring or checking for "real" libreadline, even as a >> user option, risks rms's wrath. (Of course, Python could change >> its license to GPL, which would undoubtedly flood Cambridge with >> tears of joy<wink>). > > Python's license is GPL-compatible, so this isn't an issue. > >> As long as the link to fake libreadline succeeds and the resulting >> program works identically to one linked to real libreadline, he has >> no complaint. > > My "complaint" is that libedit _calls_ itself libreadline, when it's > pretty clear that it's not actually a drop-in replacement (or the > readline module would build). Hence my use of the word "crackful" > <wink>
That's just something stupid Apple did. Not libedit's fault. -bob _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
