On 6/10/23 1:49 PM, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
S M wrote in <DS7PR19MB445653200E02F41EB31397C5E351A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx\ ook.com>: |On Fri, Jun 09, 2023 at 11:29:15PM +0200, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote: |> Quoting Dalai Lama (50 years in India jubilee) "it is all there". |> FreeBSD bin/sh/histedit.c:sh_matches() as well as :sh_complete() |> (all BSD licensed). | |So is it a licensing concern? I still think Readline is more I do not think BSD-3-clause disallows bundling within GPL. But i am a total licensing idiot.
Readline is licensed using GPL3. You may wish to check whether or not that is compatible with dash's BSD licensing. That's something the dash folks have to decide for themselves.
|featureful as I have worked with both. I did poke around NetBSD's It surely is. (Much more so, but also fat.) |ash code and remember that it used an internal Libedit header |"filecomplete.h" or something along those lines to implement |filename completion. Not that porting or re-implementing such |internal routines would be particularly hard. If I recall correctly |there is a publicfunction in libedit named "_el_fn_complete" |that implements something along those lines. | |If it's a licensing problem then there's no way around it, though |I thought that GPL restrictions of this kind would only apply to |redistributed binaries linked against readline and not to the |source code itself. Well it _could_ be possible to compile dash with any editing and simply use "rlwrap"[1] (cudo Stephen Isard) to hook readline into dash. Then your effort has already ended.
If you use rlwrap, you don't have the insight into the internal state of the application that allows you to do completion on anything more than what readline understands natively (filenames, mostly). -- ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU chet@xxxxxxxx http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/
