| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>, Alfred Perlstein <bright(at)wintelcom(dot)net>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: GNU readline and BSD license |
| Date: | 2000-12-30 01:34:24 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.30.0012300212450.822-100000@peter.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
The Hermit Hacker writes:
> Actually, IMHO, the pro to moving to libedit is that we could include it
> as part of the distribution and make history a *standard* feature
History already is a standard feature, you just need to have readline
installed. In a world of source code users need to cope with package
dependencies, and it's not like readline is the most esoteric package in
the world. Gradually adding operating system level things into a package
purely to convenience some users is a way to piss of the users at large
because you're overriding their operating system setup.
If libedit could be used as an alternative to readline depending on your
operating system setup then there's nothing wrong with that. NetBSD
already went the other way around and made libedit compatible with
readline.
But given that readline availability during the last five years was
apparently just fine I don't understand this discussion at all.
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net http://yi.org/peter-e/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Adam Haberlach | 2000-12-30 01:37:41 | Re: GNU readline and BSD license |
| Previous Message | Paul A Vixie | 2000-12-30 01:30:19 | Re: how do i store \0 inside a text attribute? |