Volker A. Brandt wrote: > Alan Coopersmith writes: >> Volker A. Brandt wrote: >>> However, there is also the fact that Sun had already committed to >>> a scripting language, Perl. There was a statement that Perl was a core >>> part of Solaris and would always be present on the miniroot. (I am >>> not saying that Perl would be markedly faster here.) >> And there can be only one? Doesn't that mean perl was also a mistake since >> Sun had already committed to sh as a scripting language available on the >> miniroot? (Just taking your argument to its logical conclusion > > Good point. I actually would have preferred a C implementation for pkg(5).
% find . -name '*.c' ./util/misc/extract_hostid.c ./util/distro-import/ksh-wrapper.c ./brand/support.c ./modules/actions/_actions.c ./modules/arch.c ./modules/pspawn.c ./modules/liblist.c ./modules/elf.c ./modules/elfextract.c ./modules/solver/py_solver.c ./modules/solver/solver.c The parts that benefit from being in C are in C. > What gets lost in this discussion is the need for a bridge over the > gap between you Sun engineers in your ivory tower designing pure and > well-defined systems and us consultants and software developers needing > to implement automation during system installation in some reasonable > reproducible way. Isn't that why we have opensolaris and the community discussions? -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org