On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 14:20, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> I've ranted before about implementing "standard" tools in Perl.  The
> user experience just isn't the same as with C code.
> 
> But even more so than with nl(1), why would we want to use something
> that's different from what everybody else uses?  If we want bzip2 in
> base (and I think there are good reasons for having it) we should
> simply use the standard bzip2 code.

I don't have a problem with importing bzip2, per se. But iirc previous
discussions basically ended with "it adds more code and will slow down
builds." But we've already been slowing down builds for the past two
years. Adding another copy of the C version returns us to the bloat
discussion. I'm trying to dance around that objection by using code
that already has been imported and built.

It's not so much that I really need bzip2 in base. But having paid the
cost to build, I'd like some return on that investment. At least
that's my rationale.

Reply via email to