On Wednesday 18 January 2006 16:25, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > Unless rms has changed his position on this, or there has been > relevant legislation or a court decision in the meantime, > explicitly requiring or checking for "real" libreadline, even as a > user option, risks rms's wrath. (Of course, Python could change > its license to GPL, which would undoubtedly flood Cambridge with > tears of joy<wink>). Python's license is GPL-compatible, so this isn't an issue. > As long as the link to fake libreadline succeeds and the resulting > program works identically to one linked to real libreadline, he has > no complaint. My "complaint" is that libedit _calls_ itself libreadline, when it's pretty clear that it's not actually a drop-in replacement (or the readline module would build). Hence my use of the word "crackful" <wink> Anthony -- Anthony Baxter <anthony at interlink.com.au> It's never too late to have a happy childhood.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4