Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Mail-Followup-To: gcc AT gcc DOT gnu DOT org, gdb AT sources DOT redhat DOT com, binutils AT sources DOT redhat DOT com, cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com, dj AT redhat DOT com From: Ian Lance Taylor To: DJ Delorie Cc: gcc AT gcc DOT gnu DOT org, gdb AT sources DOT redhat DOT com, binutils AT sources DOT redhat DOT com, cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Subject: Re: Another RFC: regex in libiberty References: <200106080127 DOT VAA01308 AT greed DOT delorie DOT com> Date: 07 Jun 2001 18:31:08 -0700 In-Reply-To: <200106080127.VAA01308@greed.delorie.com> Message-ID: Lines: 22 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii DJ Delorie 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 -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple