From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Aug 12 16:18:51 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA00119
          for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 12 Aug 1997 16:18:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cypher.net (black@zen.pratt.edu [205.232.115.155])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA00110
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Tue, 12 Aug 1997 16:18:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from black@localhost) by cypher.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id TAA11981; Tue, 12 Aug 1997 19:23:09 -0400
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 19:23:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ben Black <black@zen.cypher.net>
To: Jaye Mathisen <mrcpu@cdsnet.net>
cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: What's the interest in standard tools rewritten in perl?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.95.970812152451.1820L-100000@mail.cdsnet.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.91.970812192221.8275A-100000@zen.cypher.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

implement a key system service in a language that requires the presence 
of a complete compiler for it to run?  i don't think so.

On Tue, 12 Aug 1997, Jaye Mathisen wrote:

> 
> 
> I was in the process of adding some flexibility to newsyslog, and decided
> to just rewrite the darn thing in perl5.
> 
> Essentially I added the ability to datestamp the logfiles, and a couple of
> other things.
> 
> I can always call it something else (newnewsyslog?), but I was wondering
> if FreeBSD Inc would consider utilities that were not written in C?  Seems
> like there was some discussion about lack of tools in TCL and Perl, but
> I'm not sure about the politics of tool replacement, as opposed to tool
> addition.
> 
> Anyway, just curious.
>