On 2023/5/9 04:20, Jeremy Sowden wrote:
> Thanks for the offer. :) I've cloned the osquery repo and it appears to
> use the C++ Linenoise NG fork:
No problem ;) It uses the -ng fork, but the fork's repo was archived in 2017,
which leads me back to the original. And
> which is what I started packaging. The reason that I stopped work on it
> was that linenoise is intended to be used by adding the sources to the
> code-base of the application that wants the functionality. I created a
> PR to add support for building it as a shared library:
is "solved" by adding a make target that builds a .so ("solved" only in my
opinion, of course). But…
> and there has been no response (mind you, there are a lot of open PR's
> going back years), so I wasn't sure whether it was worth adding to
> Debian.
This is indeed a problem, which I overlooked at first. A second check shows 59
open issues vs 24 closed, and as you said 73 open PRs vs 54 closed, an obvious
sign of abandonment, overlooked largely due to its recent commits.
> I've had a quick look at the linenoise-ng repo and it appears to be
> API-compatible with the original and has a [c]make file, so it may be a
> better candidate for packaging -- particularly now that you have
> provided a use-case for it. I'll take a closer look and see how much of
> my work can be salvaged.
Speaking of API-compatible — I asked in #debian-mentors and someone expressed
strong concern over the lack of versioning of the original, while -ng at least
has a macro that defines its version.
In the compatibility sense I'm now more on the -ng side. Personally I don't like
cmake… but it's fine on this level.
The use case is a big headache, vendoring everything with its various own
compilation tweaks baked in cmake files. linenoise is hardly a problem compared
to that… Still, happy to help ;)
--
Sdrager,
Blair Noctis
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature