From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jun 21 00:06:52 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E718C1065680 for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 00:06:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dave.list@pixelhammer.com) Received: from smtp2.tls.net (smtp2.tls.net [65.196.224.83]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A9A08FC0C for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 00:06:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dave.list@pixelhammer.com) Received: (qmail 92858 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2008 23:40:10 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.2.3 ppid: 92849, pid: 92855, t: 0.1740s scanners: attach: 1.2.3 spam: 3.2.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.1 (2007-05-02) on smtp-2.tls.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,TVD_RCVD_IP autolearn=disabled version=3.2.1 Received: from 64-184-8-77.bb.hrtc.net (HELO ?192.168.1.42?) (ldg%tls.net@64.184.8.77) by auth-smtp2.tls.net with ESMTPA; 20 Jun 2008 23:40:09 -0000 Message-ID: <485C3FD4.5020809@pixelhammer.com> Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 19:40:04 -0400 From: DAve User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: questions@freebsd.org References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: Re: Circumstance leading up to removal of perl from base? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 00:06:53 -0000 Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote: > Hello all, > > I know it was a long time ago, but I was talking with a co-worker about > why perl was removed from the base in v5 -- I seem to recall a > discussion on some mailing list about either the number of arguments or > the format of the arguments and/or output of a base perl function having > changed between 5.005 and 5.6.1. > > Thing is, that's a very vague thing to try to google for, and I can't > seem to find it. Are there any old-timers who remember the system call > in question? > > Please let me know, IIRC it was removed for other reasons. I seem to remember that it was problematic as few used the base perl, most used the port build which was often installed as a dependency anyway. I viewed it as a good thing as I always ended up installing a module or two, or six, from ports. No unused perl install, no issues with software getting confused about which perl to run, no need for... what was that command to use the port perl instead of the base perl? I cannot remember anymore. DAve -- Don't tell me I'm driving the cart!