GNU-compatible, BSD-licensed bc

[Stefan Esser]

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