Re: tmux(1) in base

В Mon, 21 Sep 2009 13:26:57 +0200
Ed Schouten <ed_at_80386.nl> пишет:

> Hi all,
> 
> At the DevSummit in Cambridge we briefly discussed including tmux(1)
> in the base system. We recently had window(1) there, but unfortunately
> window(1) was a very limited tool, compared to tools like screen(1)
> and tmux(1). Why tmux(1) and not screen(1)? Well, simple. The first
> has a better license and very active maintenance.
> 
> I was talking with the author on IRC the other day and it seemed like
> I spoke with him at a fortunate moment, because he was just about to
> release version 1.0. I think it would be nice to import this into
> HEAD, which means FreeBSD 9.0 (maybe 8.1?) will include it by default.
> 
> How to test tmux in base:
> 
> - Download this tarball and extract it to contrib/tmux:
>   http://downloads.sourceforge.net/tmux/tmux-1.0.tar.gz
> - Apply the following patch:
>   http://80386.nl/pub/tmux.diff
> 
> Comments?
> 

I don't think tmux(1) should be included in the base system. As it was
mentioned, it will be hard to update it, many people will still install
screen(1) because they still like it more, or just got used to it, the
system will become a little more bloated, and nobody likes when that
happens :)

Offtopic part (maybe we should start another discussion thread):
The thing I'll be happy to see someday in base system is zsh(1).
tcsh(1) syntax is not Bourne shell compatible, and sh(1) sucks at
interactive work; it's a big deal for me, I'd like to have a shell that
can do both things simultaneously :)
Despite the zsh(1) has appropriate license, it needs autotools and
iconv (both GPL AFAIK), so it's hard to include in the base system.
The things in the base system I always wondered about are sendmail
and bind9. These are pretty heavy, and definitely are not used in every
single installation. Maybe someday I'll see sendmail and bind9 in ports
instead of base system. And yes, I know about WITHOUT_BIND= and
WITHOUT_SENDMAIL= :)

-- 
wbr,
Boo