Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 07 Sep 2006 11:33:16 -0700
From:      Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
To:        John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au>, Garance A Drosehn <gad@freebsd.org>, Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Attempt #3, adding a new command 'sfilter'
Message-ID:  <450065EC.7040604@elischer.org>
In-Reply-To: <200609071057.44515.jhb@freebsd.org>
References:  <200608281545.k7SFjn6l063922@lurza.secnetix.de> <44FF71AD.7060508@FreeBSD.org> <44FF72B9.7000201@elischer.org> <200609071057.44515.jhb@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John Baldwin wrote:

>On Wednesday 06 September 2006 21:15, Julian Elischer wrote:
>  
>
>>Maxim Sobolev wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Why not just write simple 5-line script in your favorite scripting 
>>>language (perl, python, ruby etc) that does just this and forget about 
>>>it? I don't think performance is really a concern here since the most 
>>>time this program will spend waiting for the I/O anyway, so that doing 
>>>it in C makes little or no sense.
>>>
>>>IMHO this is one of the reasons we do have all those lightweight 
>>>languages around - to avoid having separate utility and/or command 
>>>line option for each and every particular situation.
>>>
>>>-Maxim 
>>>      
>>>
>>
>>perl is not lightweight to install on a machine.
>>have you seen how much crap  gets installed when you add perl?
>>
>>lightweight is adding 100 instructions or so to 'date'.
>>or adding the strftime instruction to awk (as it is in gawk)
>>    
>>
>
>Why not install the gawk port on the machines you need this on rather than 
>perl and use gawk then?  It doesn't look to be that heavyweight of a port.
>  
>

so, instead of "add 20 lines of C and make something generally usefull, 
install another entire program"



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?450065EC.7040604>