Perry E. Metzger writes:
> 
> I'll repeat, however, my gentle plea that Perl is an exception. As
> I've noted, its much easier to build system configuration
> tools/package tools in Perl, and unless the language is bundled it
> isn't possible to assume that your target has it.
> 
> Perry

Guys, let's end this once and for all. It's filling up everyone's mbox.
;-) If packages were made available for bash, perl, tcsh and other nifty
utils, I don't mind downloading them and installing it on my system. No
big deal. I find perl very useful, but don't see it as a critical thing
that need to be included in an OS release. On the other hand, I like
writing tcl/tk scripts too. Shells like tcsh is nice (I learned csh before
sh), but it's too big to be a replacement shell for csh. Whatever happened
to the KISS principle (Keep It Simple, Sir or Stupid)? I think packages is
the way to go. Instead of people crying about program X is not included
with NetBSD, why not build package X for NetBSD? Now, if we can only get
packages built for everyone architecture supported... My opinion, of
course.
-- 
Jim