From: Ian Lance Taylor <ian@zembu.com>
To: DJ Delorie <dj@redhat.com>
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, gdb@sources.redhat.com,
binutils@sources.redhat.com, cygwin@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: Another RFC: regex in libiberty
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 18:31:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <si1yovn4f7.fsf@daffy.airs.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200106080127.VAA01308@greed.delorie.com>
DJ Delorie <dj@redhat.com> writes:
> [More lists added to get a wider audience]
>
> I didn't get a clear feeling about what people wanted wrt this. I saw
> three people propose three versions of regex, not much to go on. Is
> this a big deal? Will it really get used by everyone who currently
> has their own regex? Is it important to try to use a BSD-licensed
> regex to minimize future problems?
>
> The two contenders seem to be a modified GNU regex and the
> ever-popular Henry Spencer's regex. Does anyone have any strong
> opinions for either of these, or against any regex in libiberty at
> all?
gdb already ships with gnu-regex.c. Why not just move that to
libiberty?
I can't see any reason for a BSD-licensed regex in libiberty.
libiberty already GPL code.
Ian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-06-07 18:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <Daniel>
[not found] ` <Vogel's>
[not found] ` <message>
[not found] ` <of>
[not found] ` <Mon,>
[not found] ` <01>
[not found] ` <Nov>
[not found] ` <1999>
[not found] ` <14:25:01>
[not found] ` <+0100>
[not found] ` <381D94AD.B37EC167@grafzahl.de>
1999-11-08 8:54 ` go32-nat.c compilation problem Pierre Muller
[not found] ` <Fri,>
[not found] ` <08>
[not found] ` <Jun>
[not found] ` <2001>
[not found] ` <10:06:51>
[not found] ` <+0300>
2001-06-07 18:27 ` Another RFC: regex in libiberty DJ Delorie
2001-06-07 18:31 ` Ian Lance Taylor [this message]
2001-06-07 18:33 ` DJ Delorie
2001-06-07 18:43 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2001-06-08 0:11 ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-06-08 9:18 ` Mark Mitchell
2001-06-08 9:59 ` Zack Weinberg
2001-06-08 10:05 ` H . J . Lu
2001-06-08 10:31 ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-06-08 10:39 ` H . J . Lu
2001-06-08 10:37 ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-06-11 22:49 ` Jim Blandy
2001-06-11 23:51 ` Randall R Schulz
2001-06-12 6:48 ` Jim Blandy
2001-06-08 1:15 ` Pierre Muller
2001-06-08 1:36 ` About struct bpp_transfer_params ±èµæÃß
2001-06-08 7:43 ` Fernando Nasser
2001-06-09 13:34 ` Another RFC: regex in libiberty Andrew Cagney
[not found] <Eli>
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=si1yovn4f7.fsf@daffy.airs.com \
--to=ian@zembu.com \
--cc=binutils@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=cygwin@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=dj@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox