Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 27 Oct 1996 22:32:12 +0100
From:      regnauld@tetard.glou.eu.org (Philippe Regnauld)
To:        sos@FreeBSD.org
Cc:        hackers@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Base tree bloating (Was: ex/vi version 1.79 now available for anonymous ftp.)
Message-ID:  <199610272132.WAA03470@tetard.glou.eu.org>
In-Reply-To: <199610240947.LAA06952@ra.dkuug.dk>; from sos@FreeBSD.org on Oct 24, 1996 11:47:12 %2B0200
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.95.961024120710.28783D-100000@creator.gu.kiev.ua> <199610240947.LAA06952@ra.dkuug.dk>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
sos@FreeBSD.org (sos) ecrit/writes:

> Actually I think NONE of them (tcl, perl?) belong in the base OS, but
> they are fine as ports (so are the new vi :) )

	I tend to agree with you.  I guess  that now that there are several
	Perl dependencies in the  tree (killall, adduser,  etc...), there's
	really no way of making Perl optional (well, it  COULD be made that
	Perl and  all  those that need  it  be only  installed  if Perl  is
	checked at Install time -- call it 'mandatory packages' :-P ). 

	As for tcl, well, I guess that having Perl  already there made it a
	'come one, come all' policy -- something to be avoided. 

	This is why, as much as I like Perl, importing Perl 5 should be put
	off, if not  permanently, at least for a  while: as Ollivier Robert
	wrote, 5.002 was bugged, 5.003  is a kludge, and  5.004 is not  out
	yet.  

	Furthermore,  that's 8 more  MB in the  BASE tree!   I'm sorry, but
	that's a LOT compared to the size  of the minimal bin distribution.

	Perl 5 should remain a port. 

> We have been polluting our base tree with this stuff for too long,

	I  think PHK's '/usr/src/contrib'  policy  is  already a  good step
	towards 'modularity'   (call  it 'purity'  if  you  like).  Without
	wanting  to sound like    Linux Slackware, what about  install-time
	selecting those distribs that are in the /usr/src/contrib ?

> and it seems we are getting a habit of more is better. Why do we have
> ports at all, hell put it all in the base tree, and I'll do a
> "back to basics BSD" for the purists to run... (nice idea btw)...

	More work towards  modularity, i.e.: rewrite adduser  et al in  sh.
	We don't need SosBSD :-))) 

	
-- 
							-- Phil

-[ Philippe Regnauld / regnauld@eu.org / +55.4N +11.3E @ Sol3 / +45 31241690 ]-
-[ "To kårve or nøt to kårve, that is the qvestion..."          -- My sister ]-



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199610272132.WAA03470>