> 
>  
> I really don't like the idea of putting a dependency on perl into the NetBSD.
> 
> Once you start doing that, you start looking at a LARGE number of shellscripts
> out there and PERL-izing them, and before you know it its 'yet another 
flavour'
> time where ported s/w doesn't work, getting some currency between NetBSD and
> released stuff like Ultrix/STunOS etc dies...
> 
> If perl admin stuff is going to come along, can we start up a /usr/contrib
> subtree and put it there? or /usr/local/etc?
> 
> -George
> 

IMHO, decisions like this should take into consideration of who the enemy is... 
Windows/NT.  With that in mind, I think perl would be a good place to start to 
make things better, but I don't think it goes far enough.  I'd suggest to all 
the O/S development groups out there, including NetBSD, that X should be part 
of the base system along with tcl/tk for administration duties.  It would be 
nice to  see a second-stage bootstrap initialization that came up in some tk 
application to get the rest set up on a machine.

The *free* O/S products should be there to foster *new* development and O/S 
environment ideas, and I suggest that this is a worthwhile activity.

--
Dennis Sherod, Data General Corporation   UUCP: ..!uunet!spsd!dennis_sherod
2603 Main St., Ste. 360, Irvine, CA 92714 ARPA: dennis_sherod@irvine.dg.com
FAX: +1 714 724 3989                      VOICE: +1 714 724 3951


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