From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jun 21 06:29:22 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E5C21065680 for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 06:29:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jonathan+freebsd-questions@hst.org.za) Received: from hermes.hst.org.za (onix.hst.org.za [209.203.2.133]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61D8B8FC21 for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 06:29:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jonathan+freebsd-questions@hst.org.za) Received: from [10.1.11.1] ([10.1.11.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by hermes.hst.org.za (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m5L6RXeO019603 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 08:27:33 +0200 (SAST) (envelope-from jonathan+freebsd-questions@hst.org.za) From: Jonathan McKeown To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 08:29:10 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.4 References: In-Reply-To: X-Face: $@VrUx^RHy/}yu]jKf/<4T%/d|F+$j-Ol2"2J$q+%OK1]&/G_S9(=?iso-8859-1?q?HkaQ*=60!=3FYOK=3FY!=27M=60C=0A=09aP=5C9nVPF8Q=7DCilHH8l?= =?iso-8859-1?q?=3B=7E!42HK6=273lg4J=7Daz?=@1Dqqh:J]M^"YPn*2IWrZON$1+G?oX3@ =?iso-8859-1?q?k=230=0A=0954XDRg=3DYn=5FF-etwot4U=24b?=dTS{i X-Spam-Score: -4.373 () ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.61 on 209.203.2.133 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 06:29:22 -0000 On Saturday 21 June 2008 01:02, 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? As I remember it, the debate revolved around the regression testing and porting effort of updating the (then very outdated) system Perl, and the large space requirements, especially as more and more CPAN modules were absorbed into the Perl core: there was some discussion about producing a lightweight version by leaving out core modules not used in the base system - at which the Perl people, not unreasonably in my view, invoked the Principle of Least Astonishment, saying that being available in every installation was rather the point of core modules. The conclusion, which made an awful lot of sense, was that the FreeBSD developers would replace the last few scripts in the base system that required Perl, so that Perl could be removed from the base system. This meant that Perl users could use the port, which tracks the current release of Perl more closely than the (properly) rather conservative update cycle Perl had had as part of the FreeBSD base. At the time, the discussion generated controversy among people not directly involved, although the discussion itself was amicable and rational, from what I remember of it. The release notes for FreeBSD 5.0 seem to be dated Jan 2003, so I would imagine digging through mailing lists for 2002 would shed more light - certainly googling for perl removed freebsd gave me a number of links to use.perl.org (for the Perl community's view), Slashdot and various other places. Jonathan