Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 12:29:20 -0700 (PDT) From: "Brian N. Handy" <handy@sag.space.lockheed.com> To: Tom <tom@uniserve.com> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Make this a relese coordinator decision (was Re: ports-current/packages-current discontinued) Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.96.970803120525.11285A-100000@sag.space.lockheed.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970803113829.3843C-100000@shell.uniserve.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[Trimmed cc: back a bit...] [Brian jumps in the fray in spite of the cries "No! No!"] On Sun, 3 Aug 1997, Tom wrote: [Now, stuff deleted so everything can be taken out of context] >[...] Plus, FreeBSD has perl scripts in the tree. These apps >should be able to take advantage of the extra structured elements (like >improved module support) too. Bah. I'd love to have perl5 in the tree...well, no. I'd like to be able to get Perl by myself so I can have Perl5.00[4567...] rather than whatever we have in the tree. If we import Perl5 we'll make sure to cut out all the stuff that comes with it so it's a half-baked import that only works most of the time, and then when I grab some port that needs perl5.00n+1, I'll end up grabbing the latest port *anyway* so I'll soon have two copies of perl5 on my machine. This is the problem I have with bloat in the source tree. It seems to rarely do any good to have Perl and tcl there since I end up with three copies of each anyway. Someone suggested that sysinstall should get it's own [cvs-speak term here for whatever happened to the docs a while ago]..."space" so it evolves on it's own. That just seemed like a wildly neat idea to me. Jordan and the sysinstall types would be happy (heh) since they'd have tcl. The newbies would be happy since they had the easiest-to-use sysinstall tool on the planet. And the rest of us could be happy because we could use it once and then nuke the whole sysinstall directory immediately and start installing whatever version[s] of tcl and tk and perl [...] we want at a particular moment, and not worry about how two concurrent versions of tcl or perl are causing grief. There's a strong chance I'm horribly naive on this. I see that Jordan desparately wants tcl to forge ahead, I just wish it was more disposable than it is now. I've also heard the arguments about how this is wrong, and someone immediately takes the extreme case -- that if we get rid of perl and tcl, then we've got to get rid of xten, tn3270, bleah, bleah, bleah. Yea whatever. I don't use xten, but then xten doesn't wreak havoc on my machine because I have three different versions of it trying to cohabitate on my system disk. Brian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.OSF.3.96.970803120525.11285A-100000>