Date: Tue, 28 Mar 1995 18:24:09 -0800 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@freefall.cdrom.com> To: Amancio Hasty <hasty@star-gate.com> Cc: Nate Williams <nate@trout.sri.mt.net>, hackers@freefall.cdrom.com Subject: Re: MBONE interfaces and snazzy install tools. Message-ID: <2711.796443849@freefall.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 28 Mar 95 17:44:28 GMT." <199503281744.RAA11596@star-gate.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> That was not the point . I merely wanted to say that at least a major > company has adopted tcl/tk for the kind of stuff we want to do. Boys! Boys! For the record, I am a rabid TCL/Tk fan and have used it in actual paid contract work for the last 3 years (and, in each case, to general kudos and acclaim from the client who never expected to be provided with a solution with that much power and flexibility in so short a time). But that's not the point. The point is that I'm receiving FAR more contributions from the PERL fans than I ever have from the TCL folks, and it's contributions that I'm relying on to make the 2.1 installation something that can actually compete with some of the better Linux stuff. Also note that we have TWO problems here, not just one. The primary installation needs to work with what we're able to link into a boot floppy, and this doesn't (currently) include PERL. For the secondary installation, meaning tasks that can be done after you've already set the user's disk up (at which point you've already ASKED a number of the questions you wanted to ask and can no longer benefit from an all-singing all-dancing perl based tool), then you can rely on more tools. I suggest that anyone not really sure what I'm talking about take a look at the contents of /usr/src/release and see how the floppies are built. This will give you some idea as to the limitations we're forced to work under! Thanks! Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2711.796443849>