Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001 02:46:57 -0700 From: Seth Kingsley <sethk@meowfishies.com> To: Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon@atg.aciworldwide.com> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NO_AWK Message-ID: <20011025024656.C52429@fluff.meowfishies.com> In-Reply-To: <200110250153.f9P1rd0H071528@atg.aciworldwide.com>; from lyndon@atg.aciworldwide.com on Wed, Oct 24, 2001 at 07:53:39PM -0600 References: <200110250153.f9P1rd0H071528@atg.aciworldwide.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--St7VIuEGZ6dlpu13 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Oct 24, 2001 at 07:53:39PM -0600, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > For a long while now I've been running with the bwk version of awk > in preference to the GNU gawk shipped in the base OS. Nothing has > broken as a result of the change, therefore I'm starting to wonder > if a NO_AWK macro for make.conf might not be appropriate. I second this motion. Scripts shouldn't assume that /usr/bin/awk supports GNU extensions, especially those in the base system. Using BWK awk in the base system would ensure compatiblity with traditional awk in addition to removing GPL'd software from the base system. --=20 || Seth Kingsley || Meow Meow Fluff Fluff || sethk@meowfishies.com || || rndcontrol -s 0 || --St7VIuEGZ6dlpu13 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE719+QD1AymFxBOwgRAgt8AJ431l3GBBgvqiyVjuZkxpts1PeK4gCcDbAf VtqnlCFI5RZ0xrkPAvRUhJ0= =mv+P -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --St7VIuEGZ6dlpu13-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011025024656.C52429>