[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: libreadline



On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 10:10:52AM +1000, Brian May wrote:
> 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.

Then it is probably partly ABI-compatible which I wasn't sure
about. Reading the description it says it provides not all the
features, so it isn't totally ABI compatible? That could give some
nasty bugs...

> > 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.

I think that isn't so difficult...
 
> (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).

I guess it is, as it needs a header file for the function prototypes
and other stuff. The editline header file should provide the same as
the readline header file.
 
> 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.

Then there will still be a license volitation.
 
> 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.

Your assumpation is wrong. You assume upstream won't include it, you
should assume it does.

Am I right that you actually want to have libeditline provide
libreadline, but a simple Provide: won't work here because versioned
provides don't work?

Jeroen Dekkers
-- 
Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: jdekkers@jabber.org
Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org
IRC: jeroen@openprojects

Attachment: pgpt4qYF0H9Oq.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: