From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 57302 invoked by alias); 12 Aug 2019 19:46:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 56785 invoked by uid 89); 12 Aug 2019 19:45:22 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=attractive, anybody, compromise, feeling X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 12 Aug 2019 19:45:20 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A8AE63001834; Mon, 12 Aug 2019 19:45:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unused-10-15-17-196.yyz.redhat.com [10.15.17.196]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AFC8808AA; Mon, 12 Aug 2019 19:45:08 +0000 (UTC) From: Sergio Durigan Junior To: Tom Tromey Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] Upgrade readline References: <20190806204334.13441-1-tom@tromey.com> <874l2tdjha.fsf@redhat.com> <87mugk7oy0.fsf@tromey.com> Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 19:46:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <87mugk7oy0.fsf@tromey.com> (Tom Tromey's message of "Wed, 07 Aug 2019 13:31:03 -0600") Message-ID: <87k1bi418b.fsf@redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-08/txt/msg00249.txt.bz2 On Wednesday, August 07 2019, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Sergio" == Sergio Durigan Junior writes: > > Sergio> I'm in favour of bumping the readline version to 7 (note that Debian > Sergio> oldstable, i.e., wheezy, which was released 4+ years ago, already ships > Sergio> with readline 7), and (eventually) just get rid of our local copy. > > We talked about that briefly on irc yesterday too. Yes (for a different value of "yesterday" now). > I wonder if we really could get rid of the local copy. I mean, > obviously we could, but would it be a problem for anybody? [ /me puts his downstream hat ] I guess it depends. If the person is building GDB on a system that doesn't offer readline-dev or a similar package, then it can be a "problem" in the sense that he or she will have to compile readline by hand, probably. Otherwise, I don't see how it can be a problem. As I pointed out during the IRC discussion, the two major GNU distros (Fedora and Debian) are already compiling their GDB packages using --with-system-readline, so, in a way, our readline copy is not needed. These distros also provide readline-dev, which makes it very easy for users to compile their own GDBs without using our local readline copy. OOC, I went to check how Arch[GNU/]Linux compiles GDB, and they are also using --with-system-readline. > We could treat it a few ways. One would be like libiconv: keep the > top-level configury around so it's possible to drop the readline sources > into the tree and then build. That'd be a good compromise, IMO. > Another way would be to use something like guix for these dependencies. > I don't know if that works on all the hosts that we care about. > > The guix way is attractive since it seems vaguely analogous to using > "cargo" in the Rust world. In particular if we could do something like > this, maybe we could be less conservative about bringing in new > dependencies. The guix idea seems awesome, but that's because I like guix ;-). If I'm honest, I don't like the idea of keeping readline in-tree at all; I'd prefer to have guix manage some "obscure" dependency that can be missing in some system. But that's me and my "let's not turn everything into a flatpak" feeling ;-). > I think either of these solutions would also fix the bug we found with > moving gdbsupport to the top level (i.e. that it interacts poorly with > --with-system-readline). (I never got a response to that note, so if > you're reading this, I'd appreciate a quick look at that as well.) I'll take a look, thanks for mentioning! Cheers, -- Sergio GPG key ID: 237A 54B1 0287 28BF 00EF 31F4 D0EB 7628 65FC 5E36 Please send encrypted e-mail if possible http://sergiodj.net/