From owner-freebsd-current Sat Mar 16 09:52:15 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id JAA21283 for current-outgoing; Sat, 16 Mar 1996 09:52:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from grumble.grondar.za (root@grumble.grondar.za [196.7.18.130]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id JAA21260 for ; Sat, 16 Mar 1996 09:52:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from grumble.grondar.za (mark@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grumble.grondar.za (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id TAA07222; Sat, 16 Mar 1996 19:50:50 +0200 (SAT) Message-Id: <199603161750.TAA07222@grumble.grondar.za> To: Ollivier Robert cc: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ok, perl5 is out, but is the menu stuff ok? Date: Sat, 16 Mar 1996 19:50:49 +0200 From: Mark Murray Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Ollivier Robert wrote: > It seems that Mark Murray said: > > (I am busy doing the Perl5.002 port right now, so I'll be able to give > > a breakdown in a couple of hours...) > > What do people have against a regular port ? I know we have a few Perl > scripts in the tree so we keep the good ol' p4. What do you want everything > in the _base_ dist ? Perl 4 is rather aged by all accounts. If all anyone is going to do when they get FreeBSD is barf and install perl5, is that not an indication that we should catch up? I personally have no great strengt of feeling either way. My only real concern here is the "embarrasment factor". Ie folks saying to me "you have _that_ old crock in there?" Personally I use the base perl a lot, but we are going to have to move sooner or later. Whats wrong with now? M -- Mark Murray 46 Harvey Rd, Claremont, Cape Town 7700, South Africa +27 21 61-3768 GMT+0200 Finger mark@grondar.za for PGP key