Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 10:21:11 -0500 From: rjk@sparcmill.grauel.com (Richard J Kuhns) To: p.richards@elsevier.co.uk Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@FreeBSD.org>, current@FreeBSD.org Subject: tcl -- what's going on here. Message-ID: <199606191521.KAA24028@sparcmill.grauel.com> In-Reply-To: <199606191153.MAA07207@cadair.elsevier.co.uk> References: <199606190353.NAA28433@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> <480.835157755@critter.tfs.com> <199606191153.MAA07207@cadair.elsevier.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I'd like to comment, speaking as a proponent and user (for both enjoyment and Real Work(TM)) of FreeBSD; I do about 90% of my development under FreeBSD-stable right now. I'm also going to ignore personal comments. Paul Richards writes: ... > bmaking things is quite tricky, I did quite a lot of them when we > started out (including the first few versions of gcc 2 we used) so I do > know what's involved but it's worth the effort because it keeps *our* > tree clean and smaller since the stuff not needed isn't brought into > our tree. If something is going to use the ports mechanism why can't it > just stay in ports? > > One of the big pluses I've heard from users when comparing, say, FreeBSD > to Linux, it the unified build environment. You're now smashing that to > pieces. > >From my point of view, the comments in the first paragraph above apply ONLY to those persons maintaining the source tree, not to the people who use it. Unless I'm the person who's doing the work, I don't care if you use bmake, gnumake, dmake, or something else I've never heard of to control the actual dependency checking and recompilation; I just want to be able to either "cd" to the appropriate directory and type "make && make install" or "cd /usr/src; make world". > All you've done is moved the sources from the ports area into the main > source tree for no good reason whatsoever. If you have tools that you'd > like to see as part of the main tree that require tcl then there are > other ways to do it, such as simply making them check for the existence > of tcl and only installing them if it exists, then people can decide whether > they want the tcl tools or not. If these new tools are going to be such > an integral part of the system then commit yourselves to supporting tcl > as part of the base OS and bmake the thing. > > This is all really nasty, there's no compelling reason for tcl to be > brought into the main tree, tcl is on every system I administer; I use it extensively. Linked with the appropriate libraries, it can greatly speed the development of tools using those libraries. IMHO, bringing tcl into the main tree would encourage the growth and development of FreeBSD. > This whole tcl idea is just plain wrong Are you referring to bringing tcl into the main tree, to not making a `bmake port' of it, or using tcl in general? -- Rich Kuhns rjk@grauel.com PO Box 6249 Tel: (317)477-6000 x319 100 Sawmill Road Lafayette, IN 47903
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199606191521.KAA24028>