From owner-freebsd-current Wed Dec 17 15:03:03 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id PAA23923 for current-outgoing; Wed, 17 Dec 1997 15:03:03 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (troutmask.apl.washington.edu [128.95.76.54]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA23913 for ; Wed, 17 Dec 1997 15:02:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: (from sgk@localhost) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.8.8/8.8.5) id PAA19911; Wed, 17 Dec 1997 15:03:30 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.1 [p0] on FreeBSD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <199712172230.JAA01693@word.smith.net.au> Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 14:48:12 -0800 (PST) From: Steve Kargl To: Mike Smith Subject: Re: why is tcl in base distribution Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Sender: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On 17-Dec-97 Mike Smith wrote: >> 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. Ah yes, the mythical sys-admin tools. If FreeBSD was a product of a local company here in Seattle, we would be screaming about vaporware. Check the CVS logs. A version of tcl was committed in June of 1996, and since that time /usr/sbin/addgroup has appeared. >> (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. I agree with this Very Smart Idea. Tcl belongs in the ports collection. Period. >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. I don't understand your point, here. I can cvsup the src tree and choose to neglect the games. I can build and install the world without the games. The only evidence that src/games exists after a make world is the fact that mtree creates /usr/games. Sure, I can do a make -DNOTCL world, and not install tcl. But, cvsup still populates src/contrib/tcl. -- Steve finger kargl@troutmask.apl.washington.edu http://troutmask.apl.washington.edu/~clesceri/kargl.html