Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline?
Date
Msg-id 200512020358.jB23wAY17188@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline?  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-patches
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.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.

That seems confusing because you would assume the default,
--without-libedit, would not use libedit, but it does.

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 use Zlib

I did preference -> prefer and removed 'bsd'.  I could name it
--with-libedit-first.  Is that better?

> > 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.

Oh, I see, if you do --blah, it complains, but you are right,
--with-blah doesn't complain.  Boohoo.

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline?