Re: Tiger and libreadline
Re: Tiger and libreadline
- Subject: Re: Tiger and libreadline
- From: Martin Costabel <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 06 May 2005 09:07:35 +0200
email@hidden wrote:
On 01/05/2005, at 6:56 PM, Martin Costabel wrote:
Many GNU packages rely on libreadline.
It seems that in Darwin there is a BSD libedit, which is symlinked
as libreadline and has a corresponding readline.h. This breaks
Octave and probably other builds.
Yes, this is annoying, but it fits into the pattern of Apple first
putting a broken version of a new open source package into OSX
(there are quite a few historical examples for this). A correct
version can probably be expected for the OSX release "Sabre-tooth
cat" :-)
The Tiger version is neither broken nor 'incorrect'. It does what it
says on the tin. It is however the BSD version not the GNU version.
It is, however, incompatible. There is no `BSD version' versus `GNU
version'. The BSD libedit resembles readline in that they both provide
emacs and vi editing modes, but there is neither source nor object
compatibility. There has been some attempt to provide both, but it's
not there yet (try key binding or multibyte character support).
In addition, there is no BSD version of libreadline. BSD libedit has
been in Mac OS X since at least 10.2. The new things are the
compatibility wrappers in readline/readline.h and, and this seems to me
to be Apple's invention, the symlinks readline/history.h->readline.h and
libreadline.dylib->libedit.2.dylib. The overall effect is the same
(licensing issues aside) as having included a very old incompatible
version of GNU readline.
I maintain that this is broken.
--
Martin
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Darwin-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden