On Jan 30, 2005, at 12:17, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sun, Jan 30, 2005 at 02:47:08PM +0100, Matthias Andree wrote:Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
In other words, it's an impossible dream to hope that all scripts will
conform to this or any of the other possible choices (remember the
perl motto). Even making everything perl in the ports collection use
a uniform style is probably an infeasible task (recall 840 ports use
/usr/bin/perl, and that's not counting the others that use another
hardcoded variant of /usr/local/bin/perl).
Well, broken ports are marked broken and removed after some months. How would broken Perl ports justify special treatment?
As I mention above, it's a rule that would be impossible to enforce on third party scripts, so it would be wasted effort to try.
Many years ago in a far off version, perl was a port and all my loyal subjects worked in peace and harmony. However, someone changed perl to be part of the base system. My subjects rebelled and refused to work saying the the perl of great price could no longer be found. After many hours of chasing this perl and correcting its location my subjects returned to work, and peace and harmony reigned again. Now I see perl going back towards being a port. This realm is not looking forward to another strike by its subjects. The grocery store strike here was more than enough. Don't need any more of them.
_______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
