Final sanity pass: xdev

[Poul-Henning Kamp]

In message <86wsa96r3v.fsf at ds4.des.no>, =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= wr
ites:
>Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> writes:
>> In fact, needing that python26 would really stop this from ever
>> getting into the base, wouldn't it?  Not that I'd mind a good excuse
>> to get python into our base, but I don't think anyone else would agree
>> with me.
>
>Trust me, you *don't* want python (or any other widely used script
>language) in base.  There's a good reason why we removed Tcl and Perl.

Actually, I think there is an obvious avenue for doing stuff like
this: rename it.

I faced this problem with libexpat for XML parsing and simply calling
the library something else solved the problem entirely:  We have had
libexpat in src for seven years and not once has a port tripped over
it.

There is nothing preventing us from importing a scripting language[1]
as long as we call it "bsdrun".

The important distinction here, is that we import a language to be
FreeBSD's built-in scripting language, we do *NOT* do it to make
it easier to run tcl, perl or python programs under FreeBSD.

Poul-Henning


[1] Meet at dawn, with loaded weapons, in front of the cathedral
to decide which, last man standing tells us which[2].

[2] If we do it, I would still argue for Tcl, because it is built to
be embedded, and small enough that you can put it into programs
like inetd, syslogd and similar[3]

[3] But I'm not going to be present at the Cathedral, because just
like our logo, this will not be decided on technical merit but by
who has the larger fan-club.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk at FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.