Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 19:23:54 +0100 (MET) From: sos@FreeBSD.org To: regnauld@tetard.glou.eu.org (Philippe Regnauld) Cc: sos@FreeBSD.org, hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Base tree bloating (Was: ex/vi version 1.79 now available for anonymous ftp.) Message-ID: <199610281823.TAA04298@ravenock.cybercity.dk> In-Reply-To: <199610272132.WAA03470@tetard.glou.eu.org> from "Philippe Regnauld" at Oct 27, 96 10:32:12 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In reply to Philippe Regnauld who wrote:
>
> sos@FreeBSD.org (sos) ecrit/writes:
>
> > Actually I think NONE of them (tcl, perl?) belong in the base OS, but
> > they are fine as ports (so are the new vi :) )
>
> I tend to agree with you. I guess that now that there are several
> Perl dependencies in the tree (killall, adduser, etc...), there's
> really no way of making Perl optional (well, it COULD be made that
> Perl and all those that need it be only installed if Perl is
> checked at Install time -- call it 'mandatory packages' :-P ).
>
> As for tcl, well, I guess that having Perl already there made it a
> 'come one, come all' policy -- something to be avoided.
>
> This is why, as much as I like Perl, importing Perl 5 should be put
> off, if not permanently, at least for a while: as Ollivier Robert
> wrote, 5.002 was bugged, 5.003 is a kludge, and 5.004 is not out
> yet.
>
> Furthermore, that's 8 more MB in the BASE tree! I'm sorry, but
> that's a LOT compared to the size of the minimal bin distribution.
>
> Perl 5 should remain a port.
Amen!!
> > We have been polluting our base tree with this stuff for too long,
>
> I think PHK's '/usr/src/contrib' policy is already a good step
> towards 'modularity' (call it 'purity' if you like). Without
> wanting to sound like Linux Slackware, what about install-time
> selecting those distribs that are in the /usr/src/contrib ?
Maybe a good idea, but we _need_ things like the compiler etc (boy
do I wish a non-GNU compiler for Xmas, and yes I know about LCC)...
> > and it seems we are getting a habit of more is better. Why do we have
> > ports at all, hell put it all in the base tree, and I'll do a
> > "back to basics BSD" for the purists to run... (nice idea btw)...
>
> More work towards modularity, i.e.: rewrite adduser et al in sh.
> We don't need SosBSD :-)))
I have looked at the perl junk we have in the tree, all of it could be
rewritten in a very short time....
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Søren Schmidt (sos@FreeBSD.org) FreeBSD Core Team
Even more code to hack -- will it ever end
..
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199610281823.TAA04298>