From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sun Nov 26 20:09:40 1995
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id UAA26231
          for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 20:09:40 -0800
Received: from ref.tfs.com (ref.tfs.com [140.145.254.251])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id UAA26223
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 20:09:35 -0800
Received: (from julian@localhost) by ref.tfs.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) id UAA19883; Sun, 26 Nov 1995 20:09:08 -0800
From: Julian Elischer <julian@ref.tfs.com>
Message-Id: <199511270409.UAA19883@ref.tfs.com>
Subject: Re: Thoughts on the install and on Red Hat Linux.
To: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au (Michael Smith)
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 20:09:08 -0800 (PST)
Cc: jkh@time.cdrom.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
In-Reply-To: <199511270148.BAA02573@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> from "Michael Smith" at Nov 27, 95 01:48:25 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 1365      
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk

> 
> Hmm.  Two days ago you were saying "it can't be done!" (or for the
> australians here, "we'll all be rooned!"), wrt. leap to X.  Has this
> changed your mind?  (I'm being optomistic here 8)
ok Hanrahan, don't get too excited..
> 
> > Can we re-open the traditional (heh heh) dialog on this topic?
there was movement at the station for the word had got around.....
> 
> 
> > 2. I think we need to sit down and devise a list of tcl commands,
I think that an install disk with a single executable 
linked with tclX, should be able to do all the installation :)

have builtin tcl scripts for all the usual commands..
(add tk when a server is found :)


> >    in their own little library and name space, for doing all the sorts
> >    of things that one might want to do to files on the system in the
> >    process of "installing packages."  Maybe we'll find that existing
> >    TCL or TCLX primitives require just a few more additions to make
> >    for a completely robust package building environment, I dunno.
> >    We'll just have to look and see.
> 
> Ok, I'm sold on TCL.  I know it's not perfect, but it's a _common_ language,
> so the available programmer-base is much larger.  Can we win the war to get
> tcl into the base distribution? 8)  This "devision" should go well with
> John's recent post wrt. the 16-step plan to a tighter installation.

>