From owner-freebsd-current Tue Oct 7 14:56:09 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id OAA26268 for current-outgoing; Tue, 7 Oct 1997 14:56:09 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current) Received: from coconut.itojun.org (root@coconut.itojun.org [210.160.95.97]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA26263; Tue, 7 Oct 1997 14:56:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from itojun@itojun.org) From: itojun@itojun.org Received: from localhost (itojun@localhost.itojun.org [127.0.0.1]) by coconut.itojun.org (8.8.5/3.6Wbeta6) with ESMTP id GAA28454; Wed, 8 Oct 1997 06:55:38 +0900 (JST) To: S ren Schmidt cc: jkh@FreeBSD.ORG (Jordan K. Hubbard), current@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: sos's message of Tue, 07 Oct 1997 18:25:05 +0200. <199710071625.SAA03958@sos.freebsd.dk> X-Template-Reply-To: itojun@itojun.org X-Template-Return-Receipt-To: itojun@itojun.org X-PGP-Fingerprint: F8 24 B4 2C 8C 98 57 FD 90 5F B4 60 79 54 16 E2 Subject: Re: Status of perl and tcl in vi? Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 06:55:38 +0900 Message-ID: <28450.876261338@coconut.itojun.org> Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >> I guess in all the fracas over Tcl, we lost vi's tcl and perl >> interpreters by default? I'm just now noticing that I can't do :tcl >> anymore where it used to work, and given that I don't use this feature >> very often I can also imagine that it might have left us some time ago >> without my noticing. Weren't we going to allow vi to link with TCL >> in -current unless NOTCL was set? >> If we could get perl upgraded to perl5 in the tree, we could include >> it too, heck. Bloat that vi binary! ;-) >AAAARRRGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!! I believe we'd better have very plain configuration (yes, no perl, no tcl) in /usr/bin/vi , and have ports directory for vi + tcl/perl. editors/nvi should be a good starting point. NOTE: editors/nvi includes multilingual extension, which is incompatible with compiled-in tcl/perl. itojun