At 9:40 AM -0700 7/17/01, Kris Kennaway wrote:
>On Tue, Jul 17, 2001, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
>
>> 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?
>
>I think hacking gdb to use libedit would cause a lot of pain for
>future maintenance, although bc allegedly supports libedit already (I
>say allegedly because last time I tried to build with it, it didn't
>compile). Vinum is the third thing in the base system which uses
>libreadline: it could feasibly be rewritten.
>
>However, gdb, vinum and bc all compile fine using the libreadline API
>shim for libedit (modulo bugs and missing features which people need
>to investigate and tell me about), leaving no dependencies on GNU
>libreadline in the base system at the present time.
Okay. So it sounds like there's a "shim" to libedit which would be
the API replacement for libreadline. Could we call that something
cute like 'libreadlinele' ('le' for 'libedit') or 'libeditrl', but
leave libreadline as a separate port?
I'm just wanted to suggest a few alternatives. I am a little uneasy
about just-replacing-libreadline, unless we have something which does
replace all of libreadline. My understanding of this libedit-shim is
that it isn't quite a complete replacement. I think we'd want to be
able to switch a component between "the real" libreadline and this
libedit-shim version. The base system would not include libreadline,
but if someone added it from ports then they wouldn't have to worry
about the real-version changing how the system-components worked.
--
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
