Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 01:28:52 +0200 From: j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) To: FreeBSD-Ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: tcl Message-ID: <19970625012852.DC01269@uriah.heep.sax.de> In-Reply-To: <199706242254.PAA14518@vader.cs.berkeley.edu>; from Satoshi Asami on Jun 24, 1997 15:54:34 -0700 References: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970624183615.22918A-100000@Journey2.mat.net> <199706242254.PAA14518@vader.cs.berkeley.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As Satoshi Asami wrote: > Yes, but that doesn't have anything to do with a certain version of > tcl being in /usr. With tcl-7.5/7.6 and tk-4.1/4.2 as well as their > Japanese counterparts, we'll still have the same problem. (Is 8.0 out > of alpha yet?) Are the different versions really still necessary? We don't even have a default /usr/local/bin/wish in one of the ports. Makes it fairly difficult to write #!/usr/local/bin/wish<what's the version today> scripts that are portable across systems. With Perl4 vs. 5, there's not much hickup. Most of the existing Perl4-only scripts should be convertible within a few minutes. What's the deal with Tcl and Tk here? -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19970625012852.DC01269>