Re: Trying to get Windows building CRM114

Paolo wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 05:39:48AM +0100, Ger Hobbelt wrote:
>   
>> On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 1:55 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia <[email protected]> wrote:
>>     
>>> Well, open source or not, it's not built into any common operating systems
>>> or system utilities. and the compression and bandwidth difference is....
>>> quite modest. For a public utility, it's a turnoff right from the start. It
>>>       
>
> well, usually 2 times and up to 3 times better compressin than stock gzip.
> Quite appreciable.
>   
Oh? Do you have specs for that somewhere?

If it's that cool, great. But since it's not broadly available yet, 
let's not insist on it. Ger is handling that exactly right, now.

>>>> Oh, and how recent were these 'I want PCRE support' inquiries exactly? At
>>>> least none of those came through these mailing lists the last 1.5 years or
>>>> I've missed something vital there.
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> I'm not the one who got asked: from discussion here, it's considerably
>>> harder than one might realize because the regexp syntax is distinct.
>>>       
>
> I'd rather keep compatibility/compilabilty with other regex libs, if that
> doesn't mean too hassles for the autoconf.
>   
That's the thing. There is not really any verified compatibility in the 
main codeline except some compilation hooks and a source file that no 
one has used in.... at least 2 years, because that's how long it's been 
since it compiled correctly. If I can find some time, I'd love to edit 
crmregex_tre.c to be 'crmregex.c' an dhave ifdef's for GNU compilation. 
That seems much safer, and is more autoconf compatible than "if you have 
this library, compile this separate .c file and rebuild everything with 
a different .h file". I've done that before building alternative 
libraries, and it's painful: I don't want to do it again.

>> then: if serious capital-wielding customers want PCRE, it's a go, huge
>>     
>
> that's not me but, ...
>
>   
>> waves of popular demand is a serious incentive, anything less is a
>> certified ditch, off to /dev/null
>> Given the waves of appeal ripping through this ML about that earlier Q
>> about PCRE, I guess its odds like Mally No-Show its a goner. Good
>>     
>
> crm114 adopted TRE from start, afaikt, 'cause of NULL support; gnu-regex 
> would be just fine for most usage. PCRE is another (*the* other) fairly
> extended regex engine out there. If eg Ville gets tired of supporting 
> TRE, PCRE would still be just a --* config option away.
> My 0.02
>   
Then let's take it up if and when there's a real demand, and try not to 
take it up because it's interesting and new.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, CA
-OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the Enterprise
-Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source participation
-Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source code: SFAD
http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H