Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 19:34:47 +0300 From: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org> To: tlambert2@mindspring.com Cc: "Andrey A. Chernov" <ache@nagual.pp.ru>, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>, Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu>, current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: libedit replacement for libreadline Message-ID: <3B55BAA6.79E9B9FD@FreeBSD.org> References: <20010716013127.A16058@xor.obsecurity.org> <20010716103351.A81876@walton.maths.tcd.ie> <20010716031932.A5930@xor.obsecurity.org> <p05101004b77a150da1f1@[128.113.24.47]> <20010717094027.A78232@xor.obsecurity.org> <p05101007b77a2351f9de@[128.113.24.47]> <20010717102713.A79329@xor.obsecurity.org> <20010718002343.A30891@nagual.pp.ru> <3B55B5E6.7D3659BD@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert wrote:
> "Andrey A. Chernov" wrote:
> > > > Okay. So it sounds like there's a "shim" to libedit which would be
> > > > the API replacement for libreadline. Could we call that something
> > > > cute like 'libreadlinele' ('le' for 'libedit') or 'libeditrl', but
> > > > leave libreadline as a separate port?
> > >
> > > How about 'libedit'? :) I could live with that; it's just some
> > > makefile changes.
> >
> > I vote this too. We don't need stripped down libreadline under
> > 'libreadline' name pretend to be full version (f.e. for autoconf, etc.)
>
> The cryptography libraries have set a precedent here. I
> could argue the same thing about the presence of a full DES
> in libcrypt.
I failed to understand what you are trying to say. Do you mean that we have
to follow a bad practice set by that precedent at any costs, or I parsed your
message incorrectly?
-Maxim
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3B55BAA6.79E9B9FD>