From owner-freebsd-current Tue Mar 19 19:47:41 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id TAA27042 for current-outgoing; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 19:47:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from precipice.shockwave.com (precipice.shockwave.com [171.69.108.33]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id TAA27036 for ; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 19:47:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost.shockwave.com (localhost.shockwave.com [127.0.0.1]) by precipice.shockwave.com (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA09181; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 19:47:24 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603200347.TAA09181@precipice.shockwave.com> To: Tony Kimball cc: current@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: perl4 In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 19 Mar 1996 16:39:06 CST." <199603192239.QAA18506@compound> Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 19:47:24 -0800 From: Paul Traina Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk From: Tony Kimball 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