Re: A patch for gnu-regex

["H . J . Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>]

On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 09:11:35PM -0800, J.T. Conklin wrote:
> >>>>> "Mark" == Mark Kettenis <kettenis@wins.uva.nl> writes:
> Mark>    Either way is fine with me. All I want is regex in glibc 2 :-). Any
> Mark>    objections?
> 
> Mark> Is this really important?  From an engineering standpoint introducing
> Mark> a dependency on glibc may not be the right thing.  I've seen a quite a
> Mark> few problems related to regex.h that were caused by getting out of
> Mark> sync with glibc.  I'd prefer not to add this to GDB 5.0.
> 
> I think Mark makes a good point.  In fact, I vaguely remember
> conflicts with regex.c/regex.h that caused those files to be renamed

I believe that is because there are several different implementations
of regex.c/regex.h.

> to gnu-regex.c/gnu-regex.h back in the mid 90's.  
> 

The current master copy of GNU regex is in glibc. I'd like to be
able to compile gdb on a known good glibc base system using the
GNU regex in glibc. I don't want to spend time to check if gdb
has the updated regex or not. It is also useful when you compile a
GNU/Linux system from the source. I don't like have N copies of the
same thing in my source tree. If possible, everyone should use the
master copy.


H.J.