Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 18 Dec 1997 09:00:38 +1030
From:      Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>
To:        Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
Cc:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: why is tcl in base distribution 
Message-ID:  <199712172230.JAA01693@word.smith.net.au>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 17 Dec 1997 09:48:44 -0800." <XFMail.971217095622.sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I tried to build tkrat from the ports-current collection, and to
> my amazement the make process tried to install the tcl80 port.  tcl80
> is a duplicate of tcl installed by a make world.  So, 
> 
> (1) Why is tcl in the base distribution if it is not used?

Because the plan is to have it used.  There are a number of 
in-development tools which will benefit a great deal from its presence. 
You can also argue that it's a major development tool, as is Perl5, 
which is waiting for a stable release and a committer ready to use it.

> (2) Why is the ports-current collection ignoring the version of
>     tcl installed with the base distribution?

Because the ports collection strives to be self-contained.  This is a 
Very Smart Idea, not the least because if the anti-bloat faction rips 
Tcl bleeding from the corpse of the system, the ports will still work.

If you really want to sew little gold stars on parts of the system, I'd 
start with the games collection, some of the libraries (libss has been 
identified as a candidate for replacement, with some work, for 
example), and then a sweep over the other binaries.

mike





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199712172230.JAA01693>