[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: devel or mk readline
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 11:13:13AM +0900, OBATA Akio wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 08:36:30 +0900, Patrick Welche
> <prlw1%cam.ac.uk@localhost> wrote:
> >When should one use
> > mk/readline.buildlink3.mk
> Both GNU readline and BSD editline are acceptable.
> (formerly for the case using devel/readline/buildlink3.mk)
> >as opposed to
> > devel/readline/buildlink3.mk
> True GNU readline is only acceptable.
> (formerly USE_GNU_READLINE=yes)
In that case, I don't understand:
date: 2013/07/17 21:22:40; author: adam; state: Exp; lines: +4 -4
Distfile got changed (licence clause in mans). Revision bump.
Don't use mk/readline.buildlink3.mk! Must be devel/readline/buildlink3.mk!
which is from mysql55-client, which I looked at when trying to fix the
MySQL two different source tarballs with the same name problem for
Leaving the mk/readline.buildlink3.mk alone, I get for mysql56-client
$ ldd /usr/pkg/bin/mysql
-lpthread.1 => /usr/lib/libpthread.so.1
-lgcc_s.1 => /usr/lib/libgcc_s.so.1
-lc.12 => /usr/lib/libc.so.12
-ledit.3 => /usr/lib/libedit.so.3
-lterminfo.1 => /lib/libterminfo.so.1
-lz.1 => /usr/lib/libz.so.1
-lssl.10 => /usr/lib/libssl.so.10
-lcrypto.8 => /usr/lib/libcrypto.so.8
-lcrypt.1 => /lib/libcrypt.so.1
-lstdc++.7 => /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.7
-lm.0 => /usr/lib/libm.so.0
So, libedit seems OK. Should that bit of the mysql55-client patch be
reverted? What was the problem?
Main Index |
Thread Index |