Re: removing libreadline from base system

On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 12:57:20PM +0700, Max Khon wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 8:55 AM, David O'Brien <obrien@freebsd.org> wrote:
> 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.
> 
> Then you need to define what base system is.

Eh?  Its the same definition has been for the past 17 years -- that which
is in /usr/src.

As long as there is a GPL consumer of libreadline in /usr/src, there is
no benefit to kicking libreadline out of /usr/src.

I understand the anti-GPL sentiment -- I've done my share over the years
to help achieve a GPL-free FreeBSD.  But until there is a debugger that
is anywhere near as capable (and mature) as GDB, we'll have a few GPL
bits in /usr/src.

I see that as OK -- its is small and contained.

Show me a non-GPL consumer of libreadline in /usr/src and I'll do
everything I can to have it work with libedit.

When I added the libreadline compatibility to libedit, I changed all the
non-GPL libreadline uses I knew of to libedit.

> We have much more ports that depend on libintl or libglib2 than
> libreadline. Should we add these libs to the base system too?

Please tell me what consumer of libintl or libglib2 we have in /usr/src.

> Also, almost all ports require gmake and autotools to be built. Should we
> add them to the base system too?

You're now being quite ridiculous.

-- 
-- David  (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"