From owner-freebsd-ports  Tue Jun 24 15:23:56 1997
Return-Path: <owner-ports>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA10702
          for ports-outgoing; Tue, 24 Jun 1997 15:23:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vader.cs.berkeley.edu (vader.CS.Berkeley.EDU [128.32.38.234])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA10694
          for <FreeBSD-Ports@freebsd.org>; Tue, 24 Jun 1997 15:23:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from asami@localhost) by vader.cs.berkeley.edu (8.8.5/8.7.3) id PAA14433; Tue, 24 Jun 1997 15:22:28 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 15:22:28 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199706242222.PAA14433@vader.cs.berkeley.edu>
To: chuckr@glue.umd.edu
CC: FreeBSD-Ports@freebsd.org
In-reply-to: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970624165604.18214A-100000@Journey2.mat.net> (message from Chuck Robey on Tue, 24 Jun 1997 16:59:42 -0400 (EDT))
Subject: Re: tcl
From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
Sender: owner-ports@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

 * I know that tcl is part of the main system now.  I wish either tk was too,
 * or else that neither tcl nor tk were.  I don't really care which.
 * 
 * Am I alone in this?  If so, I won't bring it up again.

Probably not.  However, there is no way tk is going into the base
system, as it requires X.  If you ever tried building the XFree86
port, you'll know why ("make World" takes longer than "make world"!).

As for tcl, I wish it weren't there either, but it is already in the
base system and so are many scripts writting in tcl.

Besides, you brought this up in the wrong list.  -ports can't make
decisions like this. ;)

Satoshi