Gentoo Archives: gentoo-osx

From: "Mike Z." <shootingstar@×××××××××.au>
To: gentoo-osx@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-osx] Readline issues
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 02:31:42
Message-Id: DBA0FFB5-2809-4A80-8D09-E559461854FC@iinet.net.au
In Reply to: [gentoo-osx] Readline issues by Grobian
On 20/08/2005, at 11:25 PM, Grobian wrote:
...
> > Moral of the story: GNU is not Linux. Ehm, no. > - libedit appears to be a 'good enough' replacement for some tools, > good enough to make >=readline-4.1 applications compile > - libedit is in portage > - libedit is supplied with OSX > - libedit is even completer (with readline.h) supplied with Apple's > SDKs. > - there unfortunately is no virtual/readline in town, so emerging > libedit doesn't give you readline, while in fact it does.
If libedit really is a complete replacement for readline (they provide the same functionality and at least compatible symlinks) then it should be a virtual. Currently the libedit ebuild doesn't install any compatibility symlinks or the headers, which means that on Gentoo they aren't really virtuals at the moment. Making them a virtual is probably a subject for broader discussion (making libedit install readline compatibility, make libedit/readline block and make them provide="virtual/readline").
> - assumming we would just lie some more to portage about what it > has and what it doesn't have, we would have to add the readline.h > file to /usr/include and make a package.provided. >
(Because I don't know how this would be done) - where/how would we add readline.h to /usr/include?
> I think all is dirty, but not being able to compile libxml because > the testing program -- which a regular user will never use -- uses > readline for its --shell mode which it doesn't even use in make > check stinks too. >
Well making libedit/readline virtuals (if they really are) isn't dirty at all - it'd be the right solution. Not so sure about moving readline.h around... Regards, Mike -- gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list