[ On Mon, January  9, 1995 at 14:13:28 (-0500), Perry E. Metzger wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: Packages for NetBSD (Was: Why are there two 4.4BSD dev. groups) 
>
> 
> Ted Lemon says:
> > On the other hand, you can't make that argument for perl.   There's a
> > good, solid reason for wanting perl in the base distributiun: if it's
> > there, I can use it to write install scripts.   If it's not, I can't.
> 
> Ditto. Perl isn't a luxury any more -- its a basic tool. If just one
> thing could be installed by default, I'd make it Perl.

I sorta know where you guys are at, but you obviously don't take into
account the wide variety of othter environments far different than your
own out there.

We do not use perl in production here (except for one tiny set of
scripts called by CVS for our development environment, and only those
because they were already written and we don't have enough manpower to
rewrite something that alread works OK.)

I know of many other small, medium, and large sites which also do not
use perl in production.

I've no desire for perl in the NetBSD distribution, and would strongly
prefer if it were not there.

-- 
						Greg A. Woods

+1 416 443-1734			VE3TCP		robohack!woods
Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>; UniForum Canada <woods@uniforum.ca>