From owner-freebsd-current Tue Oct 7 15:47:27 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id PAA29204 for current-outgoing; Tue, 7 Oct 1997 15:47:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current) Received: from sag.space.lockheed.com (sag.space.lockheed.com [192.68.162.134]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA29199 for ; Tue, 7 Oct 1997 15:47:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from handy@sag.space.lockheed.com) Received: from localhost by sag.space.lockheed.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/21Nov95-0423PM) id AA12570; Tue, 7 Oct 1997 15:46:24 -0700 Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 15:46:23 -0700 (PDT) From: "Brian N. Handy" To: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Status of perl and tcl in vi? In-Reply-To: <28450.876261338@coconut.itojun.org> Message-Id: X-Files: The truth is out there Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >>> 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. Is it really that important? It seems to me the people that would really care about this would also be sufficiently strong-willed to go into the appropriate makefile, set the appropriate flags and fire off a recompile. Brian