Hello, On Friday 04 January 2008 12:03, Christian Maeder wrote:
...
Thanks a lot for this response.
I'm not happy about this framework hick-hack either.
I am glad we agree about that.
I've only pushed it, because we needed a readline solution on macs.
I understand that there are problems in this area, but I am not convinced that they could not be solved without the renamed and/or modified readline library. I am sorry if you have done that already elsewhere, but I don't recall having seen any details about your difficulties. Would you be kind enough to supply some details? Thanks a lot.
The alternative is to use static linking of gmp (as suggested by chak) _and_ readline (version 5), so that user programs are also statically linked with these libs.
Again, I am not convinced that this is the only alternative.
... Regarding this actual GNUreadline-framework.zip replacement, this is harmless and seems to matter only for those who build ghc with frameworks (as only the inclusion of header files changed)
It is perhaps without any practical consequences, but I have seen many cases where circumstances managed to create the most glorious confusion out of the most innocently looking changes. So I would maintain that replacing something that you have published with something different is not a good idea.
In any case we should strive to fix the frameworks issues _and_ add support for static linking of gmp, readline and possibly other libs (plus license issues).
I fully agree with this. Ideally, the plan would be to, first, figure out what the ideal solution looks like. And then work towards that ideal solution. Making sure that what we introduce on the way as short-term hacks are clearly marked as such, to ensure that they don't impress themselves on people's minds as part of the final solution. I have every intention to work out some ideal (or perhaps more modestly: better) solution. But whether it will emerge in time to make any difference, remains to be seen.
HTH Christian
Thanks and best regards Thorkil