Contributed by tj on from the end-less-puns dept.
CVSROOT: /cvs Module name: src Changes by: nicm@cvs.openbsd.org 2015/11/05 15:08:44 Modified files: usr.bin/less : brac.c ch.c charset.c charset.h cmd.h cmdbuf.c command.c cvt.c decode.c defines.h edit.c filename.c forwback.c funcs.h ifile.c input.c jump.c less.h lesskey.1 lesskey.c lesskey.h line.c linenum.c lsystem.c main.c mark.c optfunc.c option.c option.h opttbl.c os.c output.c pattern.c pattern.h position.c position.h prompt.c screen.c search.c signal.c tags.c ttyin.c version.c usr.bin/less/less: Makefile usr.bin/less/lesskey: Makefile Removed files: usr.bin/less : INSTALL Makefile.aut Makefile.dsb Makefile.dsg Makefile.dsu Makefile.in Makefile.inc Makefile.o2e Makefile.o9c Makefile.o9u Makefile.wnb Makefile.wnm NEWS README configure configure.ac defines.ds defines.h.in defines.o2 defines.o9 defines.wn help.c install.sh lessecho.c lessecho.man lessecho.nro lglob.h mkfuncs.awk mkinstalldirs pckeys.h regexp.c regexp.h scrsize.c Log message: Replace less with the cleaned-up fork of less 458 maintained by Garrett D'Amore at https://github.com/gdamore/less-fork. This has significantly less portability goop, has a tidied up code style, uses terminfo instead of termcap, and has stricter POSIX compliance. Many of our local changes have been accepted upstream: substantial remaining local changes are code to read help files from /usr/share rather than compiling them in, man page and help improvements, and some tweaks to the default options. Review and testing by millert, ok deraadt
Users of the venerable text viewing program probably won't notice any immediate differences. Having a version that's actively maintained in base, however, can only be a good thing. Some fixes from the OpenBSD crew have already been upstreamed as well.
(Comments are closed)
By Anonymous Coward (192.82.241.25) on
I don't understand this argument. :-(
Is the new less more efficent/faster?!
Currently I fail to see an advantage.
Comments
By Anonymous Coward (209.226.137.108) on
>
> I don't understand this argument. :-(
>
> Is the new less more efficent/faster?!
> Currently I fail to see an advantage.
>
I imagine the version of less used by OpenBSD is not 458, but 458 plus whatever new developments that have been added thereto; presumably development did not cease was the software was forked. The forked version also seems to be more POSIX compliant, so there is that.
By Anonymous Coward (66.18.218.182) on
Take a peek at this conversation for the triggering discussion:
openbsd-tech
And also take a moment to read the CVS log message in body of this article. Nicm@ was pretty clear on the advantages.
By Anonymous Coward (24.4.221.26) on
>
> I don't understand this argument. :-(
>
> Is the new less more efficent/faster?!
> Currently I fail to see an advantage.
>
Because this comes from the same place as all our code.
NetBSD. Garrett D'amore is just to say here than "from netbsd dev".
Comments
By rjc (rjc) on
> NetBSD. Garrett D'amore is just to say here than "from netbsd dev".
That's true Garrett had been working on NetBSD... 8 years ago.
You have also clearly missed the fact that he forked _less_ for the project he has founded - Illumos.
By Miod Vallat (miod) on
Please do yourself a favor and choke on your own feces.
Comments
By Anonymous Coward (195.92.253.2) on
>
> Please do yourself a favor and choke on your own feces.
>
You really do steel from Netbsd. Your 68k port sure did not come from Theo.
Comments
By Janne Johansson (jj) on http://www.inet6.se
> > Please do yourself a favor and choke on your own feces.
> You really do steel from Netbsd. Your 68k port sure did not come from Theo.
If only there was a family of operating systems which had a license that allowed and encouraged cross polination...