Paul Eggert wrote: > "James Youngman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Although libgmp itself has no further dependencies other than the C >> library, this is still a large-ish extra dependency. Should we also >> introduce a --without-gmp option to configure? > > Yes, particularly if it's added to 'expr'. > >> I also remember Jim mentioning something about supporting large >> numbers in expr. That seems feasible, though based on the number of >> discussions over the last year or two I would suggest that perhaps >> using GMP in "seq" might also be a win; thoughts? > > They'd both be wins, I'd say. > > Also "test", right? Though that's lower priority.
And possibly seq _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
