develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from May 2002

Re: Save a few hunderd kilobytes or a few hundred perl users?

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Terry Lambert
Date:
May 2, 2002 03:02
Subject:
Re: Save a few hunderd kilobytes or a few hundred perl users?
Message ID:
3CD0D7EC.4BEEC76D@mindspring.com
Fisher Mark wrote:
> 
>    Part 1.1Type: Plain Text (text/plain)

[ ... de-MIME-ed dso that it's distinguishable from an email virus ... ]

] I've read all the messages in this thread, but I'm still unclear -- are we
] talking about building the "miniperl" that Perl already creates during the
] build process?  If not, the minimal perl for building the FreeBSD kernel
] should have a different name, like:
]         smallperl
]         modestperl
]         tightperl
]         midgetperl
]         petiteperl
] or something similar.  I see much potential for confusion if "miniperl"
] means different Perl builds in different contexts.


It's really assinine (IMO) to have a non-standard third party
application.

Either it's "perl" or it's "not perl".

The big argument here appears to be that there are a number of
CPAN modules used for writing CGIs that FreeBSD doesn't include
by default, while the perl community itself seems intent on
bloating the base perl distribution with these things... and
most everyone else considers them security risks or bloat or
whatever.

Frankly, I think if anyone were honestly concerned about bloat,
we wouldn't have perl in the base system in the first place.

So let's just take the "anti-bloat" argument off the table.

That should clear the picture up considerably.

-- Terry

Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About