From:
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To:
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc:
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org,
"Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>,
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>,
Seneca Cunningham <scunning(at)ca(dot)afilias(dot)info>
Subject:
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline?
Date:
2005-12-02 03:43:19
Message-ID:
27252.1133494999@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat )
Thread:
2005-11-21 22:38:17 from Seneca Cunningham <scunning(at)ca(dot)afilias(dot)info>
2005-11-22 00:50:48 from Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
2005-11-22 01:09:16 from Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
2005-11-22 20:49:24 from "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>
2005-11-25 17:04:12 from Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
2005-11-25 18:39:43 from Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
2005-12-02 02:44:32 from Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
2005-12-02 03:14:12 from Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
2005-12-02 03:27:32 from Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
2005-12-02 03:43:19 from Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
2005-12-02 03:58:10 from Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
2005-12-02 04:03:52 from Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
2005-12-02 15:02:14 from Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
2005-12-02 18:38:10 from Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
2005-12-02 08:28:19 from Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
2005-12-02 14:14:31 from Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
2005-12-02 17:14:09 from Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>
2005-12-02 17:28:38 from Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
2005-12-02 18:23:35 from Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
2005-12-02 18:32:42 from Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
2005-12-02 18:39:00 from Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
2005-12-02 18:47:18 from Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
2005-12-02 18:52:07 from Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
2005-12-02 19:01:05 from "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
2005-12-02 20:12:15 from Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
2005-12-02 20:27:41 from "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
2005-12-03 11:11:40 from Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
2005-12-03 13:01:19 from Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
2005-12-03 14:48:57 from Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
2005-12-03 14:53:52 from Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
2005-12-03 15:14:46 from "Michael Paesold" <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at>
2005-12-03 15:27:37 from Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
2005-12-04 03:52:22 from Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Lists:
pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches pgsql-ports
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> 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-readline. Also, we already
> test for libedit if we don't find readline. Would we stop doing that?
Well, we could rename --without-readline to --without-editing, but
I think this would just break people's existing expectations without
adding much. I don't see a problem with documenting
--with-libedit prefer libedit over libreadline
and leaving the rest alone.
> Oh, one good thing is that the new configure 2.59 we are using throws an
> error now for invalid user-supplied configure options, rather than
> silently ignoring it like it used to.
Really? I did "configure --with-bozo" and it didn't complain. It
does barf on "--bozo", but the autoconf boys have been insistent for
more than a decade that accepting --with-anything is a feature not
a bug. So I think --with-some-long-name is more user-unfriendly than
user-friendly.
regards, tom lane
In response to
Responses
pgsql-ports by date
Next :From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2005-12-02 03:58:10Subject : Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline?Previous :From : Bruce MomjianDate : 2005-12-02 03:27:32Subject : Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline?
pgsql-hackers by date
Next :From: Greg Sabino MullaneDate: 2005-12-02 03:45:53Subject : Re: Please let us know if you will come to the PostgreSQL AnniversaryPrevious :From : Neil ConwayDate : 2005-12-02 03:37:26Subject : Re: generalizing the planner knobs
pgsql-patches by date
Next :From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2005-12-02 03:58:10Subject : Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline?Previous :From : Bruce MomjianDate : 2005-12-02 03:27:32Subject : Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline?
