Quantcast

Debian readline/libedit breakage

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
137 messages Options
1234567
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage

Marko Kreen-3
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Martin Pitt <[hidden email]> wrote:

> thanks Markus for CC'ing me, I'm not on -hackers@.
>
> Markus Wanner [2011-02-14 13:37 +0100]:
>> On 02/10/2011 11:34 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=607109
>
> Note that the recent discussions happened on bug 608442, in particular
>
>  http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=608442#30
>
> and the following comments.
>
>> Personally, I'm a bit suspicious about that solution (technically as
>> well as from a licensing perspective), [...]
>
> For the record, so am I (see comment 30 in the link above), as it uses
> the very same ld.so in both cases. However, Andreas Barth pointed out
> that with LD_PRELOAD it's guaranteed that we do not "import" any code
> from the libreadline header files, which guarantees that psql doesn't
> become something that can be considered a "derived work".
>
> Technically, this is a bit fragile, of course, as there might be some
> subtle ABI differences which lead to crashes. However, the preloading
> workaround already makes the situation so much better than before, so
> IMHO it's better than the previous status quo.
>
> I don't really like this situation, and personally I'd rather move
> back to libreadline until OpenSSL or readline or PostgreSQL threatens
> Debian with a legal case for license violation (I daresay that the
> chances of this happening are very close to zero..). But oh well..

I think it would be better to revert to readline and make note
that conversion depends on libedit's readiness for unicode.
I doubt anybody in Debian is that gung-ho to veto current state...

Informing libedit about relevant problem would
be good too.  I don't see any bugs about that in Debian's
bugtracker, did you send them to upstream?

It's not like problems with openssl license is any sort of recent
news.  Solving it with preload hacks feels sleazy, as the
non-preloaded state is unusable for most of the world...

Also, I know admins who have /usr/lib/.../bin in their PATH
to get access to all admin tools.  So the preload hack would
not work for them.

--
marko

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage

Greg Smith-21
In reply to this post by Markus Wanner
Markus Wanner wrote:
> Anybody realized that this Debian bug (and several others) got closed in
> the mean time (Sunday)?  According to the changelog [1], Martin Pitt
> (which I'm CC'ing here, as he might not be aware of this thread, yet)
> worked around this issue by pre-loading readline via LD_PRELOAD for psql.
>
> Personally, I'm a bit suspicious about that solution (technically as
> well as from a licensing perspective), but it's probably the simplest
> way to let only psql link against readline.
>  

This originated in
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=608442 , and from what
I'm reading there it sounds like Martin is inserting this as a
workaround but it hasn't passed through Debian Legal yet.  I would
expect them to reject this as unacceptable.  Dynamic linking via
LD_PRELOAD is still linking, even if it happens at runtime.  I commend
Martin for buying some time here by doing that, but this doesn't change
the urgency to come up with an alternate solution much to me.  As I see
it, that change could be reverted at any time via pushback from legal.

As far as working around this by releasing our own packages goes, that's
useful, but I'd also characterize that as only a workaround rather than
a real solution.  OpenSSL is open-source, but it's not "free software"
via that standards of the FSF, which I feel is a completely reasonable
position given the license.  When you depend on a software stack built
from unambiguously free software, having components that aren't you've
wedged in there and are dependent on is never a good idea.  I won't
consider this truly resolved until GnuTLS support for PostgreSQL is in core.

--
Greg Smith   2ndQuadrant US    [hidden email]   Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support  www.2ndQuadrant.us
"PostgreSQL 9.0 High Performance": http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/books


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage

Marko Kreen-3
In reply to this post by Tom Lane-2
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 1:04 AM, Tom Lane <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <[hidden email]> writes:
>> I'll be happy if you do, but why haven't I haven't noticed, say, RedHat
>> taking this line?
>
> Less narrow-minded interpretation of GPL requirements, perhaps.
> (And yes, we have real lawyers on staff considering these issues.)

FYI, seems Fedora has been actively trying to move away from OpenSSL
for some time now:

  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/CryptoConsolidationEval
  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedoraCryptoConsolidation

Main arguments are FIPS and single-cert-store, but in the evaluation
of NSS vs. OpenSSL I think license issues have at least some impact.

--
marko

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage

Andrew Dunstan
In reply to this post by Greg Smith-21


On 02/14/2011 08:27 AM, Greg Smith wrote:

> Markus Wanner wrote:
>> Anybody realized that this Debian bug (and several others) got closed in
>> the mean time (Sunday)?  According to the changelog [1], Martin Pitt
>> (which I'm CC'ing here, as he might not be aware of this thread, yet)
>> worked around this issue by pre-loading readline via LD_PRELOAD for
>> psql.
>>
>> Personally, I'm a bit suspicious about that solution (technically as
>> well as from a licensing perspective), but it's probably the simplest
>> way to let only psql link against readline.
>
> This originated in
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=608442 , and from
> what I'm reading there it sounds like Martin is inserting this as a
> workaround but it hasn't passed through Debian Legal yet.  I would
> expect them to reject this as unacceptable.  Dynamic linking via
> LD_PRELOAD is still linking, even if it happens at runtime.  I commend
> Martin for buying some time here by doing that, but this doesn't
> change the urgency to come up with an alternate solution much to me.  
> As I see it, that change could be reverted at any time via pushback
> from legal.
>
> As far as working around this by releasing our own packages goes,
> that's useful, but I'd also characterize that as only a workaround
> rather than a real solution.  OpenSSL is open-source, but it's not
> "free software" via that standards of the FSF, which I feel is a
> completely reasonable position given the license.  When you depend on
> a software stack built from unambiguously free software, having
> components that aren't you've wedged in there and are dependent on is
> never a good idea.  I won't consider this truly resolved until GnuTLS
> support for PostgreSQL is in core.

Given the links Marko just posted, maybe NSS would be a better bet.
Apparently they also have some sort of compatibility library too.

I agree that the LD_PRELOAD trick seems absurd, and unlikely to be
acceptable to FSF types.

cheers

andrew


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage

Florian Weimer-2
In reply to this post by Stephen Frost
* Stephen Frost:

> * Greg Smith ([hidden email]) wrote:
>> -GNU libreadine is certainly never going to add an OpenSSL exemption
>
> I really wish they would, that's just them being obnoxious- it's already
> LGPL, after all..

Source?  I've only seen GPLed copies.  We wouldn't face this issue
with LGPL code.

--
Florian Weimer                <[hidden email]>
BFK edv-consulting GmbH       http://www.bfk.de/
Kriegsstraße 100              tel: +49-721-96201-1
D-76133 Karlsruhe             fax: +49-721-96201-99

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage

Stephen Frost
* Florian Weimer ([hidden email]) wrote:
> Source?  I've only seen GPLed copies.  We wouldn't face this issue
> with LGPL code.

Yeah, Greg corrected me on this already.

So we have both FSF folks *and* OpenSSL people being foolish.

Sigh.

        Stephen

signature.asc (205 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage

Stefan Kaltenbrunner
In reply to this post by Marko Kreen-3
On 02/14/2011 02:26 PM, Marko Kreen wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Martin Pitt<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>> thanks Markus for CC'ing me, I'm not on -hackers@.
>>
>> Markus Wanner [2011-02-14 13:37 +0100]:
>>> On 02/10/2011 11:34 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>>> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=607109
>>
>> Note that the recent discussions happened on bug 608442, in particular
>>
>>   http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=608442#30
>>
>> and the following comments.
>>
>>> Personally, I'm a bit suspicious about that solution (technically as
>>> well as from a licensing perspective), [...]
>>
>> For the record, so am I (see comment 30 in the link above), as it uses
>> the very same ld.so in both cases. However, Andreas Barth pointed out
>> that with LD_PRELOAD it's guaranteed that we do not "import" any code
>> from the libreadline header files, which guarantees that psql doesn't
>> become something that can be considered a "derived work".
>>
>> Technically, this is a bit fragile, of course, as there might be some
>> subtle ABI differences which lead to crashes. However, the preloading
>> workaround already makes the situation so much better than before, so
>> IMHO it's better than the previous status quo.
>>
>> I don't really like this situation, and personally I'd rather move
>> back to libreadline until OpenSSL or readline or PostgreSQL threatens
>> Debian with a legal case for license violation (I daresay that the
>> chances of this happening are very close to zero..). But oh well..
>
> I think it would be better to revert to readline and make note
> that conversion depends on libedit's readiness for unicode.
> I doubt anybody in Debian is that gung-ho to veto current state...
>
> Informing libedit about relevant problem would
> be good too.  I don't see any bugs about that in Debian's
> bugtracker, did you send them to upstream?

from what I can see upstream libedit actually has utf8 support for a
while now (as well as some other fixes) but the debian libedit version
(and also the one of other distributions) is way too old for that so
maybe most of the issues would be mood if debian updated to a newer
libedit version...


Stefan

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage

Greg Stark-3
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 6:12 AM, Stefan Kaltenbrunner
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> from what I can see upstream libedit actually has utf8 support for a while
> now (as well as some other fixes) but the debian libedit version (and also
> the one of other distributions) is way too old for that so maybe most of the
> issues would be mood if debian updated to a newer libedit version...

There's utf8 support and then there's utf8 support. last I saw libedit
didn't actually stop you from using utf8 and things kind of worked,
but none of the editing commands understand what the multibyte
characters were or understood what column position you were in so you
could easily end up deleting half a character or with the insertion
point in the middle of a character.


--
greg

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage

Stefan Kaltenbrunner
On 02/15/2011 12:37 PM, Greg Stark wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 6:12 AM, Stefan Kaltenbrunner
> <[hidden email]>  wrote:
>> from what I can see upstream libedit actually has utf8 support for a while
>> now (as well as some other fixes) but the debian libedit version (and also
>> the one of other distributions) is way too old for that so maybe most of the
>> issues would be mood if debian updated to a newer libedit version...
>
> There's utf8 support and then there's utf8 support. last I saw libedit
> didn't actually stop you from using utf8 and things kind of worked,
> but none of the editing commands understand what the multibyte
> characters were or understood what column position you were in so you
> could easily end up deleting half a character or with the insertion
> point in the middle of a character.

well I have not actually tested - I was just reading the changelog on
http://www.thrysoee.dk/editline/ which claims UTF8 "support" (whatever
that means) in the current code drop.


Stefan

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage

Bernd Helmle


--On 15. Februar 2011 18:52:04 +0100 Stefan Kaltenbrunner
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> well I have not actually tested - I was just reading the changelog on
> http://www.thrysoee.dk/editline/ which claims UTF8 "support" (whatever
> that means) in the current code drop.

I tested it....--enable-wc doesn't work as you might expect. As Greg
already said, it will bother you with a strange behavior when deleting
characters (e.g. it removes half of your prompt) and at least on my mac i
still wasn't able to enter multibyte characters like german umlauts.

--
Thanks

        Bernd

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage

Bruce Momjian
In reply to this post by Tom Lane-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage

Andrew Dunstan


On 02/16/2011 12:29 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Robert Haas<[hidden email]>  writes:
>>> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 3:10 PM, Tom Lane<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>>>> We have code that exists in both psql and the backend (cf src/port/)
>>>> so I'm not sure this really will satisfy the more rabid GPL partisans.
>>>> And this whole discussion is about satisfying the most rabid of them,
>>>> remember. �I don't really think that anything other than "relicense all
>>>> of Postgres as GPL" will make them happy.
>>> Which, by the way, *no one* has the authority to do.
>> Right.  So the long term solution in my mind is to migrate away from
>> readline and towards libedit.  I'm just not sufficiently worried about
>> this to put any of my own cycles into making libedit good enough.
> Agreed.   If we can create a database, someone can get libedit to work
> 100%!  There is no excuse for this not being done, seeing that
> libreadline has been (viral) GPL forever and has changed APIs regularly
> and broken things for us.  Even going with GNUTLS does not help us with
> that.
>
> Can someone take ownership of this, get involved with the libedit folks,
> get Debian to use their fixes, and solve this problem for us?


You're assuming a fact not in evidence, namely the existence of an
identifiable group of "libedit folks". Last time I looked there was no
such group.

I'm not greatly in favor of encouraging people to spend lots of time on
this. If they have cycles to spend I'd rather they spent them on
Postgres features, rather than a project we'd probably end up owning
forever.

(And we shouldn't assume that GnuTLS is the right replacement for
OpenSSL either, BTW).

cheers

andrew

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage

Joshua D. Drake
In reply to this post by Bruce Momjian
On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 12:29 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:

> Can someone take ownership of this, get involved with the libedit folks,
> get Debian to use their fixes, and solve this problem for us?

That is a lot easier said that done. To be frank, I thought it was
something that I would put CMD to task with because it would help not
only Pg but the much wider community as well. However, the project is
not small and I don't want CMD being solely responsible for something
that will generate exactly 0 dollars.

It is hard enough that we make well over 98% of our dollars not working
on PostgreSQL but instead working with it.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake



--
PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor
Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 509.416.6579
Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering
http://twitter.com/cmdpromptinc | http://identi.ca/commandprompt


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage

Peter Eisentraut-2
In reply to this post by Devrim GÜNDÜZ
On mån, 2011-02-14 at 15:01 +0200, Devrim GÜNDÜZ wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-02-14 at 13:52 +0100, Cédric Villemain wrote:
> > "Consider providing debian packages at debian.postgresql.org"
>
> apt.postgresql.org, please. :)

APT is not necessarily tied to Debian, nor is a Debian package
repository necessarily tied to APT.



--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage

Tom Lane-2
In reply to this post by Andrew Dunstan
Andrew Dunstan <[hidden email]> writes:
> On 02/16/2011 12:29 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> Can someone take ownership of this, get involved with the libedit folks,
>> get Debian to use their fixes, and solve this problem for us?

> You're assuming a fact not in evidence, namely the existence of an
> identifiable group of "libedit folks". Last time I looked there was no
> such group.

FWIW, we are not the only people who are unhappy with the readline
license situation.  There has been muttering on the Fedora lists about
trying to push libedit to the point where it'd be a usable drop-in
replacement, even as recently as last week:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2011-February/148473.html
I'm not sure how much manpower is likely to emerge from that quarter,
but it seems at least possible that something will get done without us
having to do it.

In the meantime, if there's anybody here who feels their talents are
more suited to fixing libedit than to hacking Postgres, I encourage them
to do so.  But I don't think it's this project's charter to fix that
problem.

                        regards, tom lane

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage

Greg Smith-21
In reply to this post by Andrew Dunstan
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> You're assuming a fact not in evidence, namely the existence of an
> identifiable group of "libedit folks". Last time I looked there was no
> such group.

There appear to be two people working periodically on the upstream
NetBSD libedit:  
http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/lib/libedit/?sortby=date

And a third who periodically packages that at
http://www.thrysoee.dk/editline/

Those are the group as far as I can tell.

It's not encouraging that the Debian issue with libedit+UTF8 has been
documented for almost year a now:  
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=579729

> (And we shouldn't assume that GnuTLS is the right replacement for
> OpenSSL either, BTW).

The idea of using NSS instead is an interesting one.  Looking at
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comparison_of_TLS_Implementations 
it does seem to match the basic feature set of OpenSSL.  And the
nss_compat_ossl compatibility layer might be useful:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Nss_compat_ossl

I find it hard to get excited about working to replace the software that
has a reasonable license here (readline) rather than trying to eliminate
dependence on the one with an unreasonable license (OpenSSL).

--
Greg Smith   2ndQuadrant US    [hidden email]   Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support  www.2ndQuadrant.us
"PostgreSQL 9.0 High Performance": http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/books


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage

Greg Stark-3
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 12:07 AM, Greg Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:

> There appear to be two people working periodically on the upstream NetBSD libedit:  http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/lib/libedit/?sortby=date
>
> And a third who periodically packages that at http://www.thrysoee.dk/editline/

I'm really confused between libedit and libeditline. They both appear
to be in Debian and I think they both trace their lineage to the
original BSD library. Was one the NetBSD maintained one and the other
the "upstream"?

> I find it hard to get excited about working to replace the software that has
> a reasonable license here (readline) rather than trying to eliminate
> dependence on the one with an unreasonable license (OpenSSL).

Personally I find there are plenty of technical reasons to run
screaming from OpenSSL anyways.

--
greg

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage

Joshua D. Drake
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 00:28 +0000, Greg Stark wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 12:07 AM, Greg Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > There appear to be two people working periodically on the upstream NetBSD libedit:  http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/lib/libedit/?sortby=date
> >
> > And a third who periodically packages that at http://www.thrysoee.dk/editline/
>
> I'm really confused between libedit and libeditline. They both appear
> to be in Debian and I think they both trace their lineage to the
> original BSD library. Was one the NetBSD maintained one and the other
> the "upstream"?
>
> > I find it hard to get excited about working to replace the software that has
> > a reasonable license here (readline) rather than trying to eliminate
> > dependence on the one with an unreasonable license (OpenSSL).
>
> Personally I find there are plenty of technical reasons to run
> screaming from OpenSSL anyways.
>

Maybe we really should consider moving to NSS insread?

http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/pki/nss/

If it solves the license problem, it is well supported etc..

JD


--
PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor
Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 509.416.6579
Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering
http://twitter.com/cmdpromptinc | http://identi.ca/commandprompt


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage

Tom Lane-2
In reply to this post by Greg Smith-21
Greg Smith <[hidden email]> writes:
> I find it hard to get excited about working to replace the software that
> has a reasonable license here (readline) rather than trying to eliminate
> dependence on the one with an unreasonable license (OpenSSL).

Hm?

The trouble with readline is that it's GPL, not LGPL, and the former is
actually *not* a reasonable license for a library.  At least not for one
that isn't trying to be viral.  There's room for argument about whether
dynamic linking exempts applications from the scope of the license, but
in the end it would be cleanest from a licensing standpoint if we
weren't using readline.  The OpenSSL license is BSD-with-advertising,
which is obnoxious in some respects but it isn't trying to force other
people to change the license on their code.

In particular, getting rid of use of OpenSSL would not be sufficient
to satisfy the most rabid GPL partisans that we were in compliance.
Whereas, if we get rid of readline, it no longer matters whether we
depend on OpenSSL.

                        regards, tom lane

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage

Tom Lane-2
In reply to this post by Greg Stark-3
Greg Stark <[hidden email]> writes:
> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 12:07 AM, Greg Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> There appear to be two people working periodically on the upstream NetBSD libedit:  http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/lib/libedit/?sortby=date
>>
>> And a third who periodically packages that at http://www.thrysoee.dk/editline/

> I'm really confused between libedit and libeditline. They both appear
> to be in Debian and I think they both trace their lineage to the
> original BSD library. Was one the NetBSD maintained one and the other
> the "upstream"?

The one in Fedora/RHEL and the one in Mac OSX both definitely consider
NetBSD to be the active upstream.  Dunno where Debian's other version
comes from.

                        regards, tom lane

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([hidden email])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
1234567
Loading...