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

Re: libreadline

On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 14:19, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Suppose the proposal is enacted.  If it is, then I essentially *can't*
> have libreadline on my system unless I refuse to have ssl-using
> applications.  (Given that having -dev libraries is important to me.)

The GPL only applies when distributing packages, you can do what you
like with your own system.

> > If you have libreadline installed, why would you want libeditline
> > installed to?
> Perhaps I might maintain a package that uses (because of licensing
> restrictions or other problems) libeditline.

If the ABI is compatible, then this shouldn't be a problem.

> Perhaps I want to make my entire system available as a place to get
> the whole system from.

Maybe it is a problem if you really want libreadline and also want to
distribute it.

There are 2 solutions I have seen so far:

        1. link programs with libreadline instead of libeditline.
        * pros: can install both at same time
        * cons: cant substitute one for the other without rebuilding.
        1. libreadline and libeditline both install libreadline.so.*
        * pros: no source code changes.
        * pros: can substitute on for the other at installation time.
        * cons: can't install both at the same time.

(sorry about the broken numbering)

Maybe we can somehow merge these two solutions?
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: