Re: [PATCHES] Should libedit be preferred to - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Joshua D. Drake
Subject Re: [PATCHES] Should libedit be preferred to
Date
Msg-id 4383E3BB.3060705@commandprompt.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCHES] Should libedit be preferred to  ("Chuck McDevitt" <cmcdevitt@greenplum.com>)
Responses Re: [PATCHES] Should libedit be preferred to  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Chuck McDevitt wrote:

>Another vote for libedit support... We at Greenplum definitely want to
>use it.
>  
>
If we are going to move toward libedit then libedit should be included 
in core. Otherwise
you are creating a dependency on the largest postgresql used OS (linux). 
The advantage
here of course is that we would be able to eliminate readline support 
and focus only on
libedit.

The downside is yet another software in core.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake



>
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>  
>


-- 
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.503.667.4564
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting
Co-Authors: PLphp, PLperl - http://www.commandprompt.com/



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
Subject: Re: server closed connection on a select query
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: syntax extension for unsupported JOINs coming from a binary only (unmodifyable) program