perl and ports
gert.cuykens at gmail.com
Wed Jan 26 14:58:25 PST 2005
> Henry Miller wrote:
> I disagree with your categorization. /usr/ports is non-factory
> additions. No factory makes snow plows. There is no way to install
> a snow-plow on a truck without wrenches.
> Installing without packages is taking the wrenches into your own hands
> and following the instructions to install after market parts.
> Installing with packages is like having a snow plow installed, you can
> take most of the pieces off yourself, without wrenches, but there is
> still an attachment frame that remains on the truck.
> If this doesn't make sense go to someplace where they get a lot of snow
> and look at how plows go onto trucks.
> Perl is not a wrench. Perl is an attachment framework that makes it
> much easier to attach extra parts. If you want a part that needs that
> framework you must either take the entire framework, or refuse the
I disagree that the usage of perl in ports is a framework because the
framework supports the snowplow all the time like x11 does that for
gnome. After the snowplow is installed the wrench has of no use for
plowing snow. Like perl has of no use after you build the package.
For me perl belongs to the base toolbox in your garage where you
installed the snowplow.
I understand it can fasten develop things up when you dont have to
recompile perl every time but is there no solution to assign a compile
option like -without perl ?
More information about the freebsd-questions