> > And while on the subject, is there any chance perl could be made a/the
> 
> Hey yeah! And then we can make cnews and inn and all the gnu tools
> and emacs and all the pbm tools a part too.

And thanks for that thoughtful, sincere and not at all sarcastic reply.
Now I can understand some of the sh*t flying around between the *BSD
teams.

Next time one of the users of a system your are working on asks a question,
count to ten before replying. You know, like when they told you as a child
before you say something you might regret, say one... two... three...
four... five... six... seven... eight... nine... ten ! Yes, even after
sounting to ten I still think you are rude.

If you are not interested in what users have to say, then why do you bother
(a) having mailing lists, and (b) work on a *free* *redistributable*
project ?

> And pretty soon it is
> 	(1) unmaintainable because we keep having to upgrade tools
> 	    when new versions come out
> 	(2) the sources become un-ftpable because they are so large.
> 
> Perl compiles out of the box. I don't think it needs to be in there.

If this is the general attitude of the core team, why isn't NetBSD just
the kernel sources and the compiler then ?

I think having perl would allow for some very sophisticatd admin script
to be written in no time flat, which are easily maintainable.

Ah well, just a user saying have fun,
-- 
Peter Galbavy				e-mail: P.Galbavy@wonderland.org
Wonderland				  work: P.Galbavy@micromuse.co.uk

	  "And you will know exactly who you are, forever,
		by knowing what it is that you love."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------