Slashdot Mirror
FreeBSD: Perl to be removed
zmcgrew writes "From Daemon News:
"The decision was made to remove Perl from the FreeBSD -current base system [earlier story ]. Perl will be supported as a port that the user can install after the base installation, however it will no longer be required. Mark Murray put out a call to the -current mailing list asking for volunteers to port all Perl scripts in the base system to another language, such as sh or C. All critical programs are already being ported, with only a few minor ones left to be claimed." Wow..."
"The decision was made to remove Perl from the FreeBSD -current base system [earlier story ]. Perl will be supported as a port that the user can install after the base installation, however it will no longer be required. Mark Murray put out a call to the -current mailing list asking for volunteers to port all Perl scripts in the base system to another language, such as sh or C. All critical programs are already being ported, with only a few minor ones left to be claimed." Wow..."
Why are they doing this? What do they have to gain by removing Perl from the base installation?
Satanosphere.com / The dot does not count as a / syllable, d
...we further confirm: *BSD is dying
1. As a perl user all i can say perl removal will be for the better. It will reduce the freebsd install size and will be easier to update perl ... w/o the need of symlinks & other cruft.
2. When Perl is integrated into the base system, users can either eat what they're given, or
jump through hoops to install a separate version and keep it separate. This change will
vastly improve and simplify supporting Perl on FreeBSD.
This makes a lot of sense. It seems like base installs can be pared down quite a bit. Is there any reason to have any shells installed? A web server shouldn't need them (not saying they aren't incredibly useful, but they might not be necessary).
Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
Like it or not from a perl perspective, perl shouldn't be required to install the OS any more than X11, tcl, python etc should be. *nix has gotten too fat. Praised be FreeBSD for getting back to its roots! Now I can install a sane perl without having to rip the old one out by its hair.
Ever install HatRed? 240 packages later, you have a 'stripped down' *nix. Talk about losing sight of the original idea....
Thank you. I'll be here all week.
Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.
It's easier to keep perl up to date and apply patches for it (maintain) if there are no critical system pieces that depend on it. Perl was never considered 'standard' and shouldn't be installed on systems that don't need or use it. Of course many people who live/breathe/eat perl are going to be surprised, but this is good for them.
-Adam
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed tht *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.
Fact: *BSD is dying
It seems that although they remove a really useful program, it does mean that the Core group and committers will have more control of everything that goes into installing and operating the system.
I suppose that some may complain because they are so used to the Windows style bloat ware where someone else makes the choices for you. Ex: Windows Media Player, I prefer Quicktime. Plus I prefer Python over Perl. But not to get into some religious war, it's nice to see that FreeBSD will leave the choice to us. After all, someone who is going to the trouble of installing FreeBSD will probably want to roll it exactly the way they want. Besides, someone can always put an ISO together will some version of Perl and other goodies.
I just installed NetBSD 1.5 last week and Perl was not included in the base distribution set. I had to install a separate port package.
cpeterso
This has been discussed on Permonks
You can also read the discussion that led to this here
tstock
[ed. note: in the following text, former FreeBSD developer Mike Smith gives his reasons for abandoning FreeBSD]
When I stood for election to the FreeBSD core team nearly two years ago, many of you will recall that it was after a long series of debates during which I maintained that too much organisation, too many rules and too much formality would be a bad thing for the project.
Today, as I read the latest discussions on the future of the FreeBSD project, I see the same problem; a few new faces and many of the old going over the same tired arguments and suggesting variations on the same worthless schemes. Frankly I'm sick of it.
FreeBSD used to be fun. It used to be about doing things the right way. It used to be something that you could sink your teeth into when the mundane chores of programming for a living got you down. It was something cool and exciting; a way to spend your spare time on an endeavour you loved that was at the same time wholesome and worthwhile.
It's not anymore. It's about bylaws and committees and reports and milestones, telling others what to do and doing what you're told. It's about who can rant the longest or shout the loudest or mislead the most people into a bloc in order to legitimise doing what they think is best. Individuals notwithstanding, the project as a whole has lost track of where it's going, and has instead become obsessed with process and mechanics.
So I'm leaving core. I don't want to feel like I should be "doing something" about a project that has lost interest in having something done for it. I don't have the energy to fight what has clearly become a losing battle; I have a life to live and a job to keep, and I won't achieve any of the goals I personally consider worthwhile if I remain obligated to care for the project.
Discussion
I'm sure that I've offended some people already; I'm sure that by the time I'm done here, I'll have offended more. If you feel a need to play to the crowd in your replies rather than make a sincere effort to address the problems I'm discussing here, please do us the courtesy of playing your politics openly.
From a technical perspective, the project faces a set of challenges that significantly outstrip our ability to deliver. Some of the resources that we need to address these challenges are tied up in the fruitless metadiscussions that have raged since we made the mistake of electing officers. Others have left in disgust, or been driven out by the culture of abuse and distraction that has grown up since then. More may well remain available to recruitment, but while the project is busy infighting our chances for successful outreach are sorely diminished.
There's no simple solution to this. For the project to move forward, one or the other of the warring philosophies must win out; either the project returns to its laid-back roots and gets on with the work, or it transforms into a super-organised engineering project and executes a brilliant plan to deliver what, ultimately, we all know we want.
Whatever path is chosen, whatever balance is struck, the choosing and the striking are the important parts. The current indecision and endless conflict are incompatible with any sort of progress.
Trying to dissect the above is far beyond the scope of any parting shot, no matter how distended. All I can really ask of you all is to let go of the minutiae for a moment and take a look at the big picture. What is the ultimate goal here? How can we get there with as little overhead as possible? How would you like to be treated by your fellow travellers?
Shouts
To the Slashdot "BSD is dying" crowd - big deal. Death is part of the cycle; take a look at your soft, pallid bodies and consider that right this very moment, parts of you are dying. See? It's not so bad.
To the bulk of the FreeBSD committerbase and the developer community at large - keep your eyes on the real goals. It's when you get distracted by the politickers that they sideline you. The tireless work that you perform keeping the system clean and building is what provides the platform for the obsessives and the prima donnas to have their moments in the sun. In the end, we need you all; in order to go forwards we must first avoid going backwards.
To the paranoid conspiracy theorists - yes, I work for Apple too. No, my resignation wasn't on Steve's direct orders, or in any way related to work I'm doing, may do, may not do, or indeed what was in the tea I had at lunchtime today. It's about real problems that the project faces, real problems that the project has brought upon itself. You can't escape them by inventing excuses about outside influence, the problem stems from within.
To the politically obsessed - give it a break, if you can. No, the project isn't a lemonade stand anymore, but it's not a world-spanning corporate juggernaut either and some of the more grandiose visions going around are in need of a solid dose of reality. Keep it simple, stupid.
To the grandstanders, the prima donnas, and anyone that thinks that they can hold the project to ransom for their own agenda - give it a break, if you can. When the current core were elected, we took a conscious stand against vigorous sanctions, and some of you have exploited that. A new core is going to have to decide whether to repeat this mistake or get tough. I hope they learn from our errors.
Future
I started work on FreeBSD because it was fun. If I'm going to continue, it has to be fun again. There are things I still feel obligated to do, and with any luck I'll find the time to meet those obligations.
However I don't feel an obligation to get involved in the political mess the project is in right now. I tried, I burnt out. I don't feel that my efforts were worthwhile. So I won't be standing for election, I won't be shouting from the sidelines, and I probably won't vote in the next round of ballots.
You could say I'm packing up my toys. I'm not going home just yet, but I'm not going to play unless you can work out how to make the project somewhere fun to be again.
= Mike
--
Not only is it more up-to-date, more easily upgraded, and able to get as bloated as Perl demands, it also includes the excellent BSDPAN.
/usr/pkg, makes them LOCALBASE clean, \o/
BSDPAN allows you to install CPAN modules and manage them like any other package (pkg_info, pkg_delete, etc), and for weenies like me who set LOCALBASE to
/usr/ports/lang/perl5 is not just there for completeness. Even if you have Perl installed from base, chances are anyone even remotely interested in Perl will want to replace it with the port anyway.
Now, if only we can convince core to remove sendmail...
I am glad PERL is on its way out. Its useless and good only in the days of Netscape 3 and blah blah back in 1997 or whatever.
You want to code? Use C or Java.. you want to build websites, use PHP or JSP. Its that simple.
Once you evaluate them all, there is no use for PERL.
so when is perl going to ripped out of the default OpenBSD install?
The record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BS are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is t survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.
Fact: *BSD is dying
Or there's sh, which you can fix instantly, but you have to learn yet another toy syntax, a syntax that is highly restrictive when it comes to real programming work.
And what is the justification for this? So it'll fit better on ancient, obsolete harware. Great, my sysadmins will piss away thousands of dollars in labor (and possibly millions in downtime) dealing with shitty languages, because it will save the hundreds of dollars it would cost to replace that old 486 router.
Equally idiotic are the arguments that using Perl for the core makes it difficult to upgrade Perl. That's because they should be different Perls. For core system stuff, there should be /usr/bin/system-perl, an old, stable, stripped-down Perl that rarely changes. Applications should use /usr/bin/perl, which can be upgraded as needed to make the latest apps run.
Morons. Hardware cost is almost always irrelevant. Dependency conflicts almost always mean you need to fork. But no, we have to change the admins to suit the machine...
-- ;-)
Kuro5hin.org: where the good times never end.
I couldn't stand the obsolete perl 5.005 which was on the base system... once you install 5.6.1, things can mess up pretty quickly if you don't take care to separate things... not to say that you have to convince sysadmins...
... one day...
The worse is that the perl5 base would install obsolete modules, like cgi.pm.... and now if you install the cgi perl port, you have to either remove the original cgi.pm (will break at the next make installword) or tweak PERL5LIB to insert the path to the new modules before the others.... thanks god all that pain in the . will be gone
It seems pretty nice. Smaller installation is good. I think most people believe this is a good choice.
But he was unmoved, and cried: "If I am mad, it is mercy! May the gods pity the man who in his callousness can remain sa
Perl is great, but its not essential. Its not a part of the operating system and should NOT be a mandatory install.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
Now all my old scripts will break. It wasn't until about a year ago that I started using "#!/usr/bin/env perl" instead of "#!/usr/bin/perl". Are they expecting me to symlink, or what?
I bitched and moaned about the size of base-install on the security mailing list; I got a lot of people with me, including, but not limited to, JKH.
The biggest reason is the fact that it breaks stuff, if you need another version of perl you have to know your system to get your box running without a hitch.
For me, the reason however was founded on security, I was tired of having to write csh-scripts to strip my system from potential security holes; including Sendmail and Perl.
It is a lot easier to secure a firewall that only has a kernel, cshell and not mcu else than the mastodont it was by default.
I run NetBSD on that box now, but anyway, good to see it as I use FreeBSD on my laptop.
Kind regards,
Da
Yeah, you get your choice of C or sh, which are bletcherous languages for system administration.
Shows how much YOU know.
Microsoft has made C Sharp run on FreeBSD.
And you can have csh, zsh, ksh OS sh as a shell.
Odds are web based adminstration is about all you can handle. (and that too is an option on FreeBSD)
That way you can have more than one version installed, and symlink /app/perl (ie. current) to /app/perl-x.y.z
What's wrong with /usr/local/perl -> /usr/local/perl-x.y.z ?
Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
expecting you to keep using env and to take the 4 minutes to install a package that will provide perl.
Honestly, the world is so full of the lazy and surly. Mmmm, teamsters.
helicoptercrash
dead flesh stinking charred flesh
freebsd death
Sounds like FreeBSD has surrendered to Linux and is dying a slow death. A moment of silence please...
It's funny! It really brings home the phrase "Being your own worst enemy"...
When I added Perl to FreeBSD pre 2.0 (This was right after the nasty little letters from USL), Perl was at 4.036 and SMALL.
It has now gotten so bloated I can't belive it! I still use and love Perl, but do we really need all of the modules included? I thought that was what CPAN was for.
BWP
(Yes, I am the one that added Perl to FreeBSD. I also can be thanked for other things such as the "GPLed" math emulator (it is not!), sun libm, the broken mitsumi CD-ROM driver of 1.0 and the original FAQ. For those that doubt me, contact me via email...:))
It was at 4:25am on the morning of April 15th 2002 that, after many failed attempts to resuscitate the dying OS, *BSD finally passed away. While *BSD has been in it's death throes for many months now and it's death has been foreseen for many years, this is still a very sad moment, a great loss for OS dilettante dabblers and *SD lovers the world over. Though *BSD has passed away, it will surely be fondly remembered for years to come by users, developers, and trlls alike. Even if you didn't enjoy using *BSD, there's no denying it's contributions to popular OS culture. Truly a Berkeley icon. It will be missed :(
[ed. note: in the following text, frmer FreeBSD developer Mike Smith gives his reasons for abandoning FreeBSD]
When I stood for election to the FreeBSD core team nearly two years ago, many of you will recall that it was after a long series of debates during which I maintained that too much organisation, too many rules and too much formality would be a bad thing for the project.
Today, as I read the latest discussions on the future of the FreeBSD project, I see the same problem; a few new faces and many of the old going over the same tired arguments and suggesting variations on the same worthless schemes. Frankly I'm sick of it.
FreeBSD used to be fun. It used to be about doing things the right way. It used to be something that you could sink your teeth into when the mundane chores of programming for a living got you down. It was something cool and exciting; a way to spend your spare time on an endeavour you loved that was at the same time wholesome and worthwhile.
It's not anymore. It's about bylaws and committees and reports and milestones, telling others what to do and doing what you're told. It's about who can rant the longest or shout the loudest or mislead the most people into a bloc in order to legitimise doing what they think is best. Individuals notwithstanding, the project as a whole has lost track of where it's going, and has instead become obsessed with process and mechanics.
So I'm leaving core. I don't want to feel like I should be "doing something" about a project that has lost interest in having something done for it. I don't have the energy to fight what has clearly become a losing battle; I have a life to live and a job to keep, and I won't achieve any of the goals I personally consider worthwhile if I remain obligated to care for the project.
Discussion
I'm sure that I've offended some people already; I'm sure that by the time I'm done here, I'll have offended more. If you feel a need to play to the crowd in your replies rather than make a sincere effort to address the problems I'm discussing here, please do us the courtesy of playing your politics openly.
From a technical perspective, the project faces a set of challenges that significantly outstrip our ability to deliver. Some of the resources that we need to address these challenges are tied up in the fruitless metadiscussions that have raged since we made the mistake of electing officers. Others have left in disgust, or been driven out by the culture of abuse and distraction that has grown up since then. More may well remain available to recruitment, but while the project is busy infighting our chances for successful outreach are sorely diminished.
There's no simple solution to this. For the project to move forward, one or the other of the warring philosophies must win out; either the project returns to its laid-back roots and gets on with the work, or it transforms into a super-organised engineering project and executes a brilliant plan to deliver what, ultimately, we all know we want.
Whatever path is chosen, whatever balance is struck, the choosing and the striking are the important parts. The current indecision and endless conflict are incompatible with any sort of progress.
Trying to dissect the above is far beyond the scope of any parting shot, no matter how distended. ll I can really ask of you all is to let go of the minutiae for a moment and take a look at the big picture. What is the ultimate goal here? How can we get there with as little overhead as possible? How would you like to be treated by your fellow travellers?
Shouts
To the Slashdot "BSD is dying" crowd - big deal. Death is part of the cycle; take a look at your soft, pallid bodies and consider that right this very moment, parts of you are dying. See? It's not so bad.
To the bulk of the FreeBSD committerbase and the developer community at large - keep your eyes on the real goals. It's when you get distracted by the politickers that they sideline you. The tireless work that you perform keeping the system clean and building is what provides the platform for the obsessives and the prima donnas to have their moments in the sun. In the end, we need you all; in order to go forwards we must first avoid going backwards.
To the paranoid conspiracy theorists - yes, I work for Apple too. No, my resignation wasn't on Steve's direct orders, or in any way related to work I'm doing, may do, may not do, or indeed what was in the tea I had at lunchtime today. It's about real problems that the project faces, real problems that the project has brought upon itself. You can't escape them by inventing excuses about outside influence, the problem stems from within.
To the politically obsessed - give it a break, if you can. No, the project isn't a lemonade stand anymore, but it's not a world-spanning corporate juggernaut either and some of the more grandiose visions going around are in need of a solid dose of reality. Keep it simple, stupid.
To the grandstanders, the prima donnas, and anyone that thinks that they can hold the project to ransom for their own agenda - give it a break, if you can. When the current core were elected, we took a conscious stand against vigorous sanctions, and some of you have exploited that. A new core is going to have to decide whether to repeat this mistake or get tough. I hope they learn from our errors.
Future
I started work on FreeBSD because it was fun. If I'm going to continue, it has to be fun again. There are things I still feel obligated to do, and with any luck I'll find the time to meet those obligations.
However I don't feel an obligation to get involved in the political mess the project is in right now. I tried, I burnt out. I don't feel that my efforts were worthwhile. So I won't be standing for election, I won't be shouting from the sidelines, and I probably won't vote in the next round of ballots.
You could say I'm packing up my toys. I'm not going home just yet, but I'm not going to play unless you can work out how to make the project somewhere fun to be again.
= Mike
--
Explain why they persist in allowing fools such as youself, who are so very easily trolled, to post responses. If anything, you should consider posting AC yourself, just to avoid having the humiliation of being gullible and dim witted associated with your name.
Of course, you may be so dim witted that you don't realize how foolish you look. Sigh. You're further evidence that the human race is going down the shitter.
Sure, we all know that *BSD is a failure, but why? Why did *BSD fail? Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there is the historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all knw *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personalities?
The record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting glom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.
I've been trying open source OS's for a while. I would love to see the day when you have a core OS install CD and the only utility that comes with it is the "Download new Packages" program. Sincerely I find that the amount of Beta programs you get when installing a new OS really bites. We should have the choice of which stable release we want rather then the latest that a group of people choose. my 2 cents.
The singular is millenium