On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 11:38, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > If libeditline conflicts, provides libreadline, and has
> > /usr/lib/libreadline.so*, then it would be 100% ABI compatible, and
> > programs would be able to use either. (you could argue that it isn't
> > currently 100% ABI compatible due to the different name).
> This is not acceptible, because I want the ability to have *both*
Just curious: Why?
If you have libreadline installed, why would you want libeditline
(remembering of course you can install libreadline in place of
libeditline on your own systems).
Of course, throughout this discussion I am assuming that libeditline is
fully ABI compatible, something I haven't investigated myself. I would
be surprised if it is not the case.
Also, I seem the package description of libeditline says that it has
fewer features. Any ideas what features it lacks?
Brian May <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org