From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jul 11 16:13:24 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 512B71065672 for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 16:13:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from roberthuff@rcn.com) Received: from smtp02.lnh.mail.rcn.net (smtp02.lnh.mail.rcn.net [207.172.157.102]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1651B8FC0A for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 16:13:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from roberthuff@rcn.com) Received: from mr02.lnh.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.157.22]) by smtp02.lnh.mail.rcn.net with ESMTP; 11 Jul 2008 12:13:23 -0400 Received: from smtp01.lnh.mail.rcn.net (smtp01.lnh.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.11]) by mr02.lnh.mail.rcn.net (MOS 3.8.6-GA) with ESMTP id OVQ12586; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 12:13:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 209-6-22-188.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com (HELO jerusalem.litteratus.org.litteratus.org) ([209.6.22.188]) by smtp01.lnh.mail.rcn.net with ESMTP; 11 Jul 2008 12:13:22 -0400 From: Robert Huff MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <18551.34465.624986.569002@jerusalem.litteratus.org> Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 12:13:21 -0400 To: David Southwell In-Reply-To: <200807110919.50885.david@vizion2000.net> References: <200807100340.38399.david@vizion2000.net> <200807110919.50885.david@vizion2000.net> X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.5 (beta28) "fuki" XEmacs Lucid X-Junkmail-Whitelist: YES (by domain whitelist at mr02.lnh.mail.rcn.net) Cc: Vivek Khera , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Parv Subject: Re: portupgrade to Perl 5.10.0 ?? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 16:13:24 -0000 David Southwell writes: > > As a practical matter, is 5.10 really all that urgent? (Bleeding-edge > > Linuxers don't count; FreeBSD is a production OS.) > > That sounds a bit complacent to me. I hope others are not likely > to be so dismissive of the needs of others. And sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar. I have ports installed that are Perl-based, or require Perl for compilation; I am not a Perl programmer, much less a zealot; I did not even know 5.10 was out. If there's a reason to have it - beyond having the latest pretty thing - then let that case be made. (Allies gathered, the cause advanced, ....) If there's a reason we don't have it yet, then let's hear about that as well. Robert Huff