Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 15:04:44 -0800 (PST) From: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> To: (Satoshi Asami) <asami@cs.berkeley.edu> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: why is tcl in base distribution Message-ID: <XFMail.971217152308.sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <199712172254.OAA05354@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 17-Dec-97 Satoshi Asami wrote: > * (1) Why is tcl in the base distribution if it is not used? > >Beats me. You can safely remove everything that matches >"/usr/*/*tcl*" and "/usr/share/mann/*/*" though. Use NOTCL for your >next make world and you will never see tcl in the base system again. What to you do about src/contrib/tcl? cvsup dutifully populates this directory. > * (2) Why is the ports-current collection ignoring the version of > * tcl installed with the base distribution? > >Because the damn thing is so incompatible with itself, and have a lot >of ports depend on each of the versions. > >If you want a longer version, I can forward you my 1.6MB archive from >the most recent round of flames. > I've been reading the mailing lists for quite sometime and recall the previous dialogue(s). Please do not missing understand me. I am not attacking the fact that the ports are self contained. I think the original arguments for including tcl in the base distribution are bogus, and tcl rightfully belongs in ports. Steve finger kargl@troutmask.apl.washington.edu http://troutmask.apl.washington.edu/~clesceri/kargl.html
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.971217152308.sgk>