Re: devel or mk readline

[Patrick Welche <prlw1%cam.ac.uk@localhost>]

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:

revision 1.24
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
mysql56-client.

Leaving the mk/readline.buildlink3.mk alone, I get for mysql56-client

$ ldd /usr/pkg/bin/mysql
/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?

Cheers,

Patrick