From owner-freebsd-current Wed Mar 20 06:34:04 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id GAA05200 for current-outgoing; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 06:34:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.think.com (Mail1.Think.COM [131.239.33.245]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA05175 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 06:34:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from Early-Bird-1.Think.COM by mail.think.com; Wed, 20 Mar 96 09:33:32 -0500 Received: from compound (fergus-29.dialup.cfa.org) by Early-Bird.Think.COM; Wed, 20 Mar 96 09:33:29 EST Received: (from alk@localhost) by compound (8.6.12/8.6.112) id IAA19341; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 08:34:00 -0600 Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 08:34:00 -0600 Message-Id: <199603201434.IAA19341@compound> From: Tony Kimball To: gclarkii@main.gbdata.com Cc: current@freefall.freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199603200802.CAA10056@main.gbdata.com> (message from Gary Clark II on Wed, 20 Mar 1996 02:02:16 -0600 (CST)) Subject: Re: perl4 Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk From: Gary Clark II Perl IS the sys admin language of choice. Many systems now ship perl with the distribution like we do. Thats why I brought it in. The fact is not at issue. The relationship between the fact and the decision is being questioned. > If I write C versions of these scripts, will that suffice > to break perl off into a package? Not really, not unless you will also re-write ALL future scripts also. I'm in the process of a total rewrite for adduser to expand it into a sysadmin system (add user, delete user, groups, change user attributes, etc). This will be a curses based system. It can go into the perl package: A perl4 version in the perl4 package, if you want to support perl4; a perl5 version in the perl5 package, if you want to support perl5. It's a good thing. I encourage and commend you. It does not belong in the base OS distribution. P.S. Sorry for the slight flamage, but I still belive we need perl. I absolutely agree that we need perl (or more accurately that "FreeBSD needs perl"). I claim that it does not belong in the base OS, because it is not tightly coupled, and because most perl users will use the most recent version, and *not* the version shipped, so it is a legacy, baggage. Making the base OS small is a Good Thing. Making it independent of the choice of perl version level is a Good Thing. The point is to give users the freedom to choose, rather than forcing them to remove perl by hand in order to eliminate an abhorrent redundancy. Would you require that XF86 be bundled as well? Mi genoito! My cause is just, because my cause is the cause of freedom. My detractors are the agents of totalitarianism. I regret only that I have but one life to give in the cause of component orthogonality.