Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 12:32:27 -0400 From: Garrett Rooney <rooneg@electricjellyfish.net> To: "Bruce A. Mah" <bmah@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: GB Clark <gclarkii@vsservices.com>, Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: The future of perl on FreeBSD Message-ID: <20020508163227.GF85290@electricjellyfish.net> In-Reply-To: <200205081608.g48G8W5p029919@intruder.bmah.org> References: <xzpd6w7ilv6.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <20020508075112.66AB638FD@overcee.wemm.org> <20020508035501.72d32dfc.gclarkii@vsservices.com> <20020508155202.GE85290@electricjellyfish.net> <200205081608.g48G8W5p029919@intruder.bmah.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, May 08, 2002 at 09:08:32AM -0700, Bruce A. Mah wrote: > If memory serves me right, Garrett Rooney wrote: > > On Wed, May 08, 2002 at 03:55:01AM -0500, GB Clark wrote: > > > > So you want to take out perl and replace it with ruby? The portupgrade > > > package is a ruby script, not C. > > > > i think he meant that we should remove it, and if people want the > > functionality they should be directed to install the portupgrade > > package from ports. it works much better than pkg_update anyway, i > > even recall seeing a post from the original author of pkg_update > > saying just that a while back. > > I don't know if the author of pkg_update has ever said that, but the > author of pkg_version (yours truly) has said something like this on > multiple occasions (with respect to pkg_version's -c option). that may have been what i was thinking of. if so, appologies to the author of pkg_update for misquoting him. -garrett -- garrett rooney Remember, any design flaw you're rooneg@electricjellyfish.net sufficiently snide about becomes http://electricjellyfish.net/ a feature. -- Dan Sugalski To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020508163227.GF85290>