Re: __FreeBSD_version bump for loss of perl

2002-05-16 Thread Kris Kennaway
On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 06:17:44PM -0600, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > > "Ade" == Ade Lovett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Ade> Because not everyone using the ports system has the in-place > Ade> editing feature of sed that was recently added, and thus it > Ade> needs to be conditi

Re: __FreeBSD_version bump for loss of perl

2002-05-16 Thread Lyndon Nerenberg
>perl -pi.hold -e 's/FOO/BAR/g' ${WRKSRC}/a/b/{X,Y} > is not as easy to do with `ed'. It's not *that* hard. 10 lines of shell script is preferable to XX MB of perl bloat. Especially for this sort of problem. --lyndon To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd

Re: __FreeBSD_version bump for loss of perl

2002-05-16 Thread David O'Brien
[bogus From: address, because people cannot be bothered to respect Reply-To:] On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 06:17:44PM -0600, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > Why can't we use ed for in-place edits? perl -pi.hold -e 's/FOO/BAR/g' ${WRKSRC}/a/b/{X,Y} is not as easy to do with `ed'. People should find so

Re: __FreeBSD_version bump for loss of perl

2002-05-16 Thread Lyndon Nerenberg
> "Ade" == Ade Lovett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Ade> Because not everyone using the ports system has the in-place Ade> editing feature of sed that was recently added, and thus it Ade> needs to be conditional on ${OSVERSION}. Why can't we use ed for in-place edits? --lyndon To

Re: __FreeBSD_version bump for loss of perl

2002-05-16 Thread David O'Brien
On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 05:52:45PM -0500, Ade Lovett wrote: > On 05/16/02 17:46, "Maxime Henrion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I agree that a __FreeBSD_version bump is appropriate, but why not always > > simply use sed for this ? > > Because not everyone using the ports system has the in-place

Re: __FreeBSD_version bump for loss of perl

2002-05-16 Thread Ade Lovett
On 05/16/02 17:46, "Maxime Henrion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I agree that a __FreeBSD_version bump is appropriate, but why not always > simply use sed for this ? Because not everyone using the ports system has the in-place editing feature of sed that was recently added, and thus it needs to b

Re: __FreeBSD_version bump for loss of perl

2002-05-16 Thread Maxime Henrion
Ade Lovett wrote: > Could we have a __FreeBSD_version bump for the diking out of perl from the > base system please? A chunk of ports work needs to be done to conditionally > use perl vs sed for in-line replacements on lots of Makefiles. I agree that a __FreeBSD_version bump is appropriate, but

__FreeBSD_version bump for loss of perl

2002-05-16 Thread Ade Lovett
Could we have a __FreeBSD_version bump for the diking out of perl from the base system please? A chunk of ports work needs to be done to conditionally use perl vs sed for in-line replacements on lots of Makefiles. Thanks, -aDe To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscrib