Volker A. Brandt wrote:
> Alan Coopersmith writes:
>> Volker A. Brandt wrote:
>>> However, there is also the fact that Sun had already committed to
>>> a scripting language, Perl. There was a statement that Perl was a core
>>> part of Solaris and would always be present on the miniroot. (I am
>>> not saying that Perl would be markedly faster here.)
>> And there can be only one? Doesn't that mean perl was also a mistake since
>> Sun had already committed to sh as a scripting language available on the
>> miniroot? (Just taking your argument to its logical conclusion
>
> Good point. I actually would have preferred a C implementation for pkg(5).
% find . -name '*.c'
./util/misc/extract_hostid.c
./util/distro-import/ksh-wrapper.c
./brand/support.c
./modules/actions/_actions.c
./modules/arch.c
./modules/pspawn.c
./modules/liblist.c
./modules/elf.c
./modules/elfextract.c
./modules/solver/py_solver.c
./modules/solver/solver.c
The parts that benefit from being in C are in C.
> What gets lost in this discussion is the need for a bridge over the
> gap between you Sun engineers in your ivory tower designing pure and
> well-defined systems and us consultants and software developers needing
> to implement automation during system installation in some reasonable
> reproducible way.
Isn't that why we have opensolaris and the community discussions?
--
-Alan Coopersmith- [email protected]
Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
