Nice analysis, but we can't hack configure like that. It has to be able
to be fully generated from its sources. I think the other source file
you would need to look at is config/programs.m4. (Not sure about quoting
$ac_popdir - why only that one?)
Also, I suspect we'd want to enable the libe
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Also, I suspect we'd want to enable the libedit preference with a switch
> rather than just force it, if we want to go this way.
Quite. My recollection is that there are other platforms on which
readline works and libedit is broken. (Readline used to
> With AIX 5, the easiest way to get a shared object is to pass
"-bexpall"
> to the linker. This results in all symbols being exported.
Yes, that is another reason not to use this broken switch.
And last time I checked (AIX 4.3.3), -bexpall did not export all needed
symbols
(e.g. globals) from th
On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 10:07:15AM +0100, Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD wrote:
> PS: I'd prefer if readline was only linked where it is needed, namely in
> psql.
The problem as stated is that people don't want to maintain lists of
libraries as needed by each program, so we link all of them.
Since it
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 07:50:48PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> Nice analysis, but we can't hack configure like that. It has to be able
> to be fully generated from its sources. I think the other source file
> you would need to look at is config/programs.m4. (Not sure about quoting
> $ac_po
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 10:07:15AM +0100, Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD wrote:
> > PS: I'd prefer if readline was only linked where it is needed, namely in
> > psql.
>
> The problem as stated is that people don't want to maintain lists o
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 07:50:48PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >
> > Nice analysis, but we can't hack configure like that. It has to be able
> > to be fully generated from its sources. I think the other source file
> > you would need to look at is config/programs.m4. (No
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Why don't we have a libedit configure flag?
Well, I can code up a configure flag, but that doesn't mean that the
thing will compile at the end. :)
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
---(end of broadcast)--
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Why don't we have a libedit configure flag?
>
> Well, I can code up a configure flag, but that doesn't mean that the
> thing will compile at the end. :)
Attached is a patch which adds a flag to configure to prefer
BSD-licensed libedit:
Bruce Momjian writes:
> --with-preference-bsd-libeditprefer libedit over readline
Can't it just be --with-libedit? That seems awfully verbose,
particularly seeing that configure doesn't handle switch abbreviation.
The patch looks OK offhand, though I didn't try to test it.
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > --with-preference-bsd-libeditprefer libedit over readline
>
> Can't it just be --with-libedit? That seems awfully verbose,
> particularly seeing that configure doesn't handle switch abbreviation.
The problem is that we need a clear way to say
Bruce Momjian writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Can't it just be --with-libedit? That seems awfully verbose,
>> particularly seeing that configure doesn't handle switch abbreviation.
> The problem is that we need a clear way to say we don't want any line
> editing. Right now we do it with --without-
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Can't it just be --with-libedit? That seems awfully verbose,
> >> particularly seeing that configure doesn't handle switch abbreviation.
>
> > The problem is that we need a clear way to say we don't want any line
> > editing. Righ
Bruce Momjian writes:
> I trimmed it down to:
> --with-prefer-libedit prefer libedit over readline
OK, I can live with that.
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will igno
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I trimmed it down to:
>
> --with-bonjour build with Bonjour support
> --with-openssl build with OpenSSL support
> --with-prefer-libedit prefer libedit over readline
> --without-readline do not use Readline
> --without-zlib do not us
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm concerned that this still gives nondeterministic behavior. There's
> no way to say, "I want readline, period" or "I want libedit, period".
> I'd prefer simple --with-readline and --with-libedit, giving one turns
> off the other, giving both is
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian writes:
I trimmed it down to:
--with-prefer-libedit prefer libedit over readline
OK, I can live with that.
I think it's ugly. Can't we just say --prefer-libedit ?
If must be a --with-foo flag, maybe --with-libedit-pre
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lane) writes:
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I'm concerned that this still gives nondeterministic behavior.
>> There's no way to say, "I want readline, period" or "I want
>> libedit, period". I'd prefer simple --with-readline and
>> --with-libedit, giving
Chris Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> To my mind, giving BIG weight to the opinions of the relatively small
> set of individuals that manage PostgreSQL packages for the popular
> distributions of Linux and *BSD seems fairly appropriate.
The packagers are bright enough to adapt to whatever we
Tom Lane wrote:
> Chris Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > To my mind, giving BIG weight to the opinions of the relatively small
> > set of individuals that manage PostgreSQL packages for the popular
> > distributions of Linux and *BSD seems fairly appropriate.
>
> The packagers are bright eno
Bruce Momjian writes:
> The basic problem is that with two deterministic flags the default
> values for those flags are unclear.
That's a really good point ... the only explainable default would be
that both are --without, which is a crummy default.
I think the way that Bruce's patch works is fi
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >>I trimmed it down to:
> >> --with-prefer-libedit prefer libedit over readline
> >
>
> I think it's ugly. Can't we just say --prefer-libedit ?
>
> If must be a --with-foo flag, maybe --with-libedit-preferred or
> --with-libedit-first would be better.
OK, changed:
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > The basic problem is that with two deterministic flags the default
> > values for those flags are unclear.
>
> That's a really good point ... the only explainable default would be
> that both are --without, which is a crummy default.
>
> I think the wa
Bruce Momjian writes:
> --with-libedit-preferred prefer libedit over readline
> --without-readline do not use Readline
Possibly
--without-readline do not use readline or libedit
In any case please be consistent about the capitalization ...
regards, tom
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > --with-libedit-preferred prefer libedit over readline
> > --without-readline do not use Readline
>
> Possibly
> --without-readline do not use readline or libedit
>
> In any case please be consistent about the capitalization ...
OK,
> OK, updated text:
>
> --with-openssl build with OpenSSL support
> --with-libedit-preferred prefer Libedit over Libreadline
> --without-readline do not use Libreadline/Libedit line editing
> --without-zlib do not use Zlib
This all seems kind of extra... Why not j
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> > OK, updated text:
> >
> > --with-openssl build with OpenSSL support
> > --with-libedit-preferred prefer Libedit over Libreadline
> > --without-readline do not use Libreadline/Libedit line editing
> > --without-zlib do not use Zlib
>
>
On Fri, 2005-12-02 at 15:12 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >
> > > OK, updated text:
> > >
> > > --with-openssl build with OpenSSL support
> > > --with-libedit-preferred prefer Libedit over Libreadline
> > > --without-readline do not use Libreadline/Li
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > In any case please be consistent about the capitalization ...
>
> OK, updated text:
>
> --with-openssl build with OpenSSL support
> --with-libedit-preferred prefer Libedit over Libreadline
> --without-readline do not use Libreadline/Libedit line editing
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > In any case please be consistent about the capitalization ...
> >
> > OK, updated text:
> >
> > --with-openssl build with OpenSSL support
> > --with-libedit-preferred prefer Libedit over Libreadline
> > --without-readline do
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > They are called "Readline" and "Libedit".
>
> I wanted to distinguish libreadline from readline-functionality.
The functionality may be called "command-line editing" but I don't see
how that relates to what actually appears in the patch.
> Why is it Readline?
PostgreSQL
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > They are called "Readline" and "Libedit".
> >
> > I wanted to distinguish libreadline from readline-functionality.
>
> The functionality may be called "command-line editing" but I don't see
> how that relates to what actually appears in the pat
Bruce Momjian wrote:
I wanted to distinguish libreadline from readline-functionality. Why is
it Readline?
"The GNU Readline Library" is usually referred to as "Readline", not
"libreadline". The offical name for "libedit" is really "Libedit".
See e.g.:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/libedi
Michael Paesold wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > I wanted to distinguish libreadline from readline-functionality. Why is
> > it Readline?
>
> "The GNU Readline Library" is usually referred to as "Readline", not
> "libreadline". The offical name for "libedit" is really "Libedit".
>
> See e.g
Patch applied.
---
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Michael Paesold wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > > I wanted to distinguish libreadline from readline-functionality. Why is
> > > it Readline?
> >
> > "The GNU Readline Libr
35 matches
Mail list logo
