Re: libreadline
On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 00:22, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> It's a damn ugly hack and I doubt it will work perfectly. We should have
> a much better solution for this problem.
I am not disputing the first sentence, however, I have tested creating
the symlink and it works perfectly.
I linked ftp in Heimdal with -lreadline, and a ldd on the binary
says it is now using editline.
> Isn't it just replacing "readline" with "editline"? If it isn't, your
> ugly hack probably won't work either.
You have to change the configure script tests to test for the existance
of libeditline.so instead if libreadline.so.
(come to thing of it, header files in one problem I haven't considered,
it might be harder to solve then the shared library; in fact
libeditline-dev doesn't have a header file, is this a bug? Although my
package doesn't seem to use readline.h anyway, except for in the
configure test).
Also, if you just replace libeditline with libreadline, it is unlikely
that upstream will incorporate it, so you have to test for both
libeditline and libreadline, and use the first one available.
You have to incorporate this in my already large patch (142 lines
according to wc --lines), and update it whenever a new version comes
out.
--
Brian May <bam@snoopy.apana.org.au>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: