Re: databases/mariadb55-client and readline

[maya%netbsd.org@localhost]

On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 09:33:01AM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> 
> maya%netbsd.org@localhost writes:
> 
> > On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 02:58:05AM +0200, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
> >> <maya%netbsd.org@localhost> wrote:
> >> 
> >> > Add
> >> > typedef char  **rl_completion_func_t(const char *, int, int);
> >> 
> >> I had to add two ifdef __NetBSD__ to get it building:
> >>  
> >> +#if defined(__NetBSD__)
> >> +typedef char   **rl_completion_func_t(const char *, int, int);
> >> +#endif
> >> 
> >> (...)
> >> 
> >> -#if !defined(HAVE_HIST_ENTRY)
> >> +#if !defined(__NetBSD__) && !defined(HAVE_HIST_ENTRY)
> >>  typedef struct _hist_entry {
> >>    const char      *line;
> >>    const char      *data;
> >>  } HIST_ENTRY; 
> >> 
> >> Of course this is not satisfying, since even NetBSD could be using real
> >> readline. There must be something borken in configure process.
> >
> > The change was made to fix the build on libedit in netbsd-8/current.
> > people seem to actively avoid readline. mariadb even bundles readline.
> > If you force include include devel/readline instead of mk/readline I
> > think it will pull in readline from pkgsrc.
> 
> People avoid readline in a number of cases where the licensing of the
> main program is BSDish/LGPLish, and using readline results in GPL.  In a
> program that is already GPL, this concern doesn't apply.  I'm not aware
> of other significant reasons to avoid it, other than preference for the
> smaller size and whatever else is different.
> 
> > this all looks like a mess. instead of a configure check, we force
> > USE_READLINE_V6 = 1. perhaps that was the crossover point and checking
> > for rl_completion_func_t instead of forcing the new interface is the
> > clean change?
> 
> Multiple separate issues here:
> 
>   What does mariadb require from a readline library, really?
> 
>   Does mariadb check for readline features/versions in a clean way which
>   works well with being handed libedit
> 
>   There should be some way to declare that as an API level and the
>   mk/readline.builtin.mk should be able to choose NetBSD's libedit vs
>   real readline based on that.   But there is currently only an
>   exhortation to include mk/readline.buildlink3.mk if you don't care and
>   one or the other if you do.  That's really a variable that encodes
>   which of the 2 are available :-)
> 
>   Does NetBSD's libedit leave out things that it could have, with little
>   effort, and make it usable in more places?
> 
> 
> 
> So I think overall for now I agree with what I think Maya is saying,
> which is that mariadb, if it doesn't just work without issues with
> NetBSD's libedit, should just include devel/readline/buildlink3.mk, and
> patches to make it work with libedit dropped.


It works fine on netbsd with libedit. It only does on netbsd-8 or
current.