> > /usr/sbin/perl is acceptable, too. > > .... but not /usr/bin/perl ?
Right. See my earlier message about /usr/bin/perl being for *Perl* users a contract. It not being a "full" Perl is like removing half of the headers of gcc since they are not absolutely needed for compiling hello.c. > > What I want to avoid is a mixup between a small/useful kit (which I'd > > expect in /usr/bin) and a minimal/config-tool kit for system > > configuration/builds only. > > > > Note that this only applies to the minimal/config-tool kit. I really > > hope FreeBSD will ship (at least) the small/useful kit. > > I'd like to do that very much. For the moment, it looks like > developer opinion is so set against the current "all or nothing" > model, that I am being asked to remove it completely. How's this? -rwxr-xr-x 1 jhi users 920824 touko� 6 16:37 microperl That's a stripped "microperl" (on Linux, but at least I got the processor right.) It contains absolutely no fluff, requires no Configure to run (all it requires is that uconfig.sh contains somewhat reasonable guesses, plus make and sh). It even cannot load dynamic stuff, so it can't eat more of precious virtual memory... :-) > M > -- > o Mark Murray > \_ > O.\_ Warning: this .sig is umop ap!sdn -- $jhi++; # http://www.iki.fi/jhi/ # There is this special biologist word we use for 'stable'. # It is 'dead'. -- Jack Cohen
