diff - GNU og BSD ?
mezz7 at cox.net
Wed Feb 18 12:13:36 PST 2004
On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 20:08:59 +0100, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 12:14:05PM -0600, Jeremy Messenger wrote:
>> Well, it's necessarily when you are taking it away from us. The GNU
>> diff has been part of base system for the very long time and you decide
>> to replace to BSD diff that has lesser feature, slower and etc. It
>> hurts. My belief, you have to make sure the BSD diff is better than GNU
>> diff for the replacement rather than worry about the GPL license since
>> there are a lot of other GPL tools in the base system where you can't
>> replace them yet (probably more like never).
>> Anyway, Matt has answered the rest and I agree with him about I see no
>> problem using GNU for utilities. I don't understand why people are
>> worry about it where it doesn't get in our way.
> Well, since we have maintain that stuff, there is a reason to worry
> about it.
Can you give me the more points on this beside BSD license is more
flexible? I doubt, you can give any unless it's something that is connect
with the kernel (ie: FS, modules and etc).
> I initially pointed Eirik to the BSD diff since it should be evaluated.
> In the special case of diff it boils down to the following points: a)
> the necessary feature set for POSIX correctness b) the necessary
> features used by our own system (e.g. mergemaster) c) the must-have
> additions (unified diffs!) d) speed.
> a und c are IMO fully satisfied. For b) the lack of sdiff is currently
> problematic. Issue d is something which can be fixed. At least buggs and
> asmodai have shown some interest to work on it.
> Just to add one more point why this discussion is necessary. DF and
> FreeBSD are currently shipping with GNU tar. GNU tar is not very well
> maintained, since even the FSF maintainer believe it is messy. We
> already have pax in the tree, which does have a tar wrapper, but isn't
> 100% compatible with GNU's pre-POSIX tar files nor the extended options.
> Having said that, GNU tar doesn't create valid POSIX tar archives, e.g.
> with path names longer than 100 characters. Pax does, so does star. Is
> this reason enough to think about extending pax's tar wrapper and remove
> GNU tar from base? We should always keep in mind, that there is
> absolutly nothing to prevent installing a GNU
> tar/diffutils/patch/whatever port to satisfy the requirements of third
> party software. There is even an example in ports, which does exactly
> this (devel/tla depends on gpatch).
So far in my replies, as I said and my point, if there are some tools that
are better than current tools in the base system, then it's good reason to
replace it. Which meaing if you find any better tar tool then I will
support the opinion of replacement.
People who want to replace the GNU diff, their reason was just BSD vs GPL
license, which it's no point and no good reason at all peroid. This is
what I will not support the opinion of replacement.
Anyway, I bet this topic will keep going and going on.. I will let you
reply above of more points if you have any, so this is my last reply. :-)
>> bsdforums.org 's moderator, mezz.
bsdforums.org 's moderator, mezz.
More information about the Submit