From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 2 04:38:23 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A28C1065670 for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 04:38:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fjoe@samodelkin.net) Received: from mail-gx0-f182.google.com (mail-gx0-f182.google.com [209.85.161.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAC298FC25 for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 04:38:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ggnk5 with SMTP id k5so3890373ggn.13 for ; Thu, 01 Dec 2011 20:38:22 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.88.99 with SMTP id bf3mr1973325obb.73.1322800701941; Thu, 01 Dec 2011 20:38:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.182.76.225 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Dec 2011 20:38:21 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [93.92.220.178] In-Reply-To: <20111202024112.GC95365@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> References: <20111202015537.GB4111@dragon.NUXI.org> <20111202024112.GC95365@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 11:38:21 +0700 Message-ID: From: Max Khon To: Brooks Davis Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: freebsd-current Subject: Re: removing libreadline from base system X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 04:38:23 -0000 Brooks, On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 9:41 AM, Brooks Davis wrote: > What is the value in doing either? > > > > libreadline isn't infecting any non-GPL code turning into GPLv2. > > > > Some of use have fancy .input files, and quite frankly the vi mode of > > libedit still doesn't work quite the same as libreadline. > > > > If you go with (2) above, we'll still have *tons* of ports that want a > > libreadline, so we'll just end up growing a port of it and we'll wind up > > with a libreadline on the system anyway. > > We are rapidly approaching the point where it will be practical to > remove all GPL code from the base system (assuming we are willing to > require external toolchains for some architectures) and a number of us > are pushing to make this a reality for 10.0. If we have people willing > to do the work now--as Max seems to be--then we might as well deal with > the ports fallout from the removal of libreadline sooner rather than > later. > > The existence of incompatibilities between libedit and libreadline > probably does argue for option (2). Agree. I submitted the patch w/ INTERNALLIB for libreadline for 10.0 exp-run. Max