GNU-compatible, BSD-licensed bc

[Conrad Meyer]

Hi Stefan,

Apologies, I misunderstood the idea.

However, it seems like any port that depends on gnubc today could continue
to depend on gnubc on older branches until a suitable replacement
propagates into stable.  (And that would be less work :-).)

Best,
Conrad

On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 2:28 AM Stefan Esser <se at freebsd.org> wrote:

> Am 08.01.19 um 01:31 schrieb Conrad Meyer:> Hi Stefan,
> >
> > I don't think there's any reason to put this in ports instead of base.
> > If you're arguing that we shouldn't ship any bc in base, that's a fine
> > argument to make, but it's off-topic for this discussion.
>
> Hi Conrad,
>
> yes, sure, if it passes our tests (I understand that it passes
> its own test suite) it should definitely be considered for base.
> I did not want to suggest a removal of bc from base at this time.
>
> But given our release cycle it will take a long time for this bc
> to actually occur in a release - that's why I proposed to create
> a port that could be depended on by other ports that currently
> require GNU bc.
>
> This would also provide us with more confidence, that this version
> is actually a fully compatible replacement for GNU bc.
>
> > If at some point after that you want to remove bc from base and fix
> > all of the fallout of that much larger change, you are welcome to take
> > on that (much larger) project.
>
> No, that's not what I wanted to suggest at this time. An existing
> port will reduce the effort required to test removal of bc from
> base (if only slightly), but bc is quite useful in base (unlike
> e.g. ctm or timed), and I'd expect it to stay ...
>
> Regards, STefan
>