Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 18:28:42 -0700 (MST) From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: Michael Smith <msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au> Cc: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams), hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Who needs Perl? We do! Message-ID: <199611220128.SAA13712@rocky.mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <199611220123.LAA16082@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> References: <199611220107.SAA13545@rocky.mt.sri.com> <199611220123.LAA16082@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > ADA compiler from the GNU folks? Where do you draw the line between > > 'useful to some' and 'bloat'. > > That is _exactly_ what this thread has been about; ref. my original > post. In my opinion, the usefulness of Perl in the base system > outweighs the 'bloat' consideration. Agreed (to a point). > > It was decided a *LONG* time ago that unless a utility was part of the > > standard BSD distribution and/or was required for the running system it > > shouldn't be part of the tree. > > That's all well and good, but it presents a chicken-and-egg situation > for anyone trying to work outside the decades-old BSD model. You may > not consider this a problem; I do. Opinions differ. Yes, but anyone capable of developing a 'cool tool' with TCL that we can't live w/out is capable of installing a port, and *then* showing me how wonderful it is to justify bringing in TCL as part of the base system. Put the cart *before* the horse. Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199611220128.SAA13712>