This is the mail archive of the email@example.com mailing list for the guile project.
|Index Nav:||[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]|
|Message Nav:||[Date Prev] [Date Next]||[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]|
> This does not really solve the problem. If a sysadmin installs Guile > without using that option, the installation of Guile on that machine > would still lead users to do something that violates our own > distribution terms, without even knowing they are doing so. > > The only real solution is that Guile must not cause readline to be > linked in. There should not be an option in Guile for sysadmins to > cause this to happen to users. > > It would be ok for Guile to be set up so that it can use readline if > *the user* chooses to link it into the program. This would not > put us in the position of leading people to violate the Readline > distribution terms. This perhaps could be done by including a weak > link to a symbol in libreadline.a. Clearly, there's no way to prevent people from installing Guile in a way that includes readline support, and misleading their users. But for our part, it should be enough to omit readline support from Guile as distributed, right? The readline support could become a separate module, which the user would explicitly request.