>>>>> "Bert" == Bert Vermeulen <b...@biot.com> writes:
Bert> On 05/07/2016 12:46 PM, Felix Fietkau wrote: >> On 2016-05-07 12:40, Bert Vermeulen wrote: >>> On 05/07/2016 12:01 PM, Felix Fietkau wrote: >>>> We should probably just move everything to libncursesw and drop >>>> libncurses entirely. >>> >>> Actually I'd gotten this wrong: libncursesw is an extra build option >>> to libncurses, so you only get it if you explicitly want it. In that >>> case though, you specifically DO want your applications to use >>> ncursesw instead of regular ncurses. >> It's a build variant, meaning both can be built and staged at the >> same time. >> >>> So regardless of whether you keep libncurses around or not, I think >>> patches preferring one or the other should be dropped, right? >> What the package ends up using absolutely needs to match the >> dependencies that the package specifies (otherwise you get a build >> error). Allowing the package source build system to simply pick one >> will result in very quirky behavior. Bert> Ok, so will you drop regular libncurses? Or do you need me to Bert> submit a patch to do it? In this particular case, as the author of the patch involved, I would suggest "if it isn't broken, don't fix it". That is, iftop doesn't really need ncursesw, the patch lets it use plain ncurses even if ncursesw is available. I don't see the problem leaving things like that. It means carrying a small patch. Seems like not that big a problem. -- Russell Senior, President russ...@personaltelco.net _______________________________________________ Lede-dev mailing list Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
