Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 19:47:24 -0800 From: Paul Traina <pst@shockwave.com> To: Tony Kimball <alk@Think.COM> Cc: current@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: perl4 Message-ID: <199603200347.TAA09181@precipice.shockwave.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 19 Mar 1996 16:39:06 CST." <199603192239.QAA18506@compound>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
From: Tony Kimball <alk@Think.COM>
Subject: perl4
I don't think this is a good argument:
- - you already have perl in /usr/bin AND in /usr/local/bin!
So remove them both from the base distribution. p4 can be made a
package at zero-maintenance cost. How much breaks, and how hard is
it to fix?
./bin/makewhatis: a /usr/bin/perl script text
./bin/catman: a /usr/bin/perl script text
./bin/killall: a /usr/bin/perl script text
./bin/sgmlfmt: a /usr/bin/perl script text
./bin/which: a /usr/bin/perl script text
./sbin/adduser: a /usr/bin/perl script text
./sbin/kbdmap: a /usr/bin/perl script text
./sbin/vidfont: a /usr/bin/perl script text
./sbin/spkrtest: a /usr/bin/perl script text
Not much. Eliminate it, and that reduces the installed base OS size
by 4MB, meaning more installations, more market share, better
differentiation from bloated commercial systems.
If I write C versions of these scripts, will that suffice
to break perl off into a package?
Hear hear! This is a good thing(TM)! By the way, which is inherantly
broken when executed as any sort of script. It needs to be a shell builtin
or it needs to die.
Paul
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199603200347.TAA09181>