On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 10:58:13AM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote: > Hi Micah, > > why would we need to ship birdcl together with birdc in one package? > That makes no sense since birdcl is just no-readline version of birdc.
I think it makes sense. Generally birdc is more suited to interactive usage, while birdcl is more suited to non-interactive usage (although both could be used in the other way). If you use birdc non-interactively using pipes, it cannot be ruled out that readline would somehow interfere undesirably with it in some unexpected way. Another possible reason is that some third-party scripts (like looking glass or scripting language bindings) use birdcl by default, so they would have to be modified to use birdc in case that birdcl is not available. -- Elen sila lumenn' omentielvo Ondrej 'Santiago' Zajicek (email: santi...@crfreenet.org) OpenPGP encrypted e-mails preferred (KeyID 0x11DEADC3, wwwkeys.pgp.net) "To err is human -- to blame it on a computer is even more so."
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
