On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 02:33:00PM +0400, Andrey A. Chernov wrote:
> > It doesn't actually impliment all of libreadline - just it's most
> > common uses. Last time I checked libedit couldn't emulate readline's
> > callback mode. I looked at implimenting the callback stuff, but it
> > would be really hard to do properly 'cos of how libedit is structured.
> > (In the end I hacked something together, but it's really ugly.)
>
> I don't think that libreadline replacement is good idea. Libreadline is
> moving target - every version adds new functions and renames old ones. I
> doubt that NetBSD people will follow libreadline closely. Moreover, I
> think some libreadline stuff is very libreadline specific and will be not
> implemened in any case. So libedit as libreadline replacement can be used
> only if you want to save some space on floppy for very simple libreadline
> application, but not in general case.
Well, it depends on how you think of it; if you think of it instead as
a "minimal libreadline" which does enough to support the other
readline consumers in the FreeBSD base OS, then it makes a lot more
sense to replace, IMO. We can make a port of GNU libreadline to
satisfy ports which need more.
Referring to Section 1.3.2 (FreeBSD Project Goals), this move seems to
be well in line with the charter of the project.
Kris
PGP signature
