Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 10 Dec 2000 20:39:51 -0700 (MST)
From:      Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com>
To:        Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org>
Cc:        current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Confusing error messages from shell image activation
Message-ID:  <14900.19591.200496.869754@nomad.yogotech.com>
In-Reply-To: <14900.2598.958785.326648@guru.mired.org>
References:  <14898.33404.356173.963351@guru.mired.org> <14898.31393.228926.763711@guru.mired.org> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0012091347030.88984-100000@turtle.looksharp.net> <200012100904.CAA27546@harmony.village.org> <3A336781.94E1646@newsguy.com> <14899.41809.754369.259894@guru.mired.org> <200012101557.KAA29588@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> <14899.43958.622675.847234@guru.mired.org> <20001210120840.C38697@vger.bsdhome.com> <14899.47196.795281.662619@zircon.seattle.wa.us> <14899.49294.958909.82912@guru.mired.org> <14899.62738.768609.598990@nomad.yogotech.com> <14899.62189.243395.903919@nomad.yogotech.com> <14900.2598.958785.326648@guru.mired.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > I'm aware that software was installing itself in /usr/local years
> > > before it was installing in /opt. On the other hand, vendor software
> > > was installing in /opt years before I ever saw it install in
> > > /usr/local.
> > Most vendor software I know pre-dates /opt, and installed itself in
> > /usr/local.  I'm with Warner on this one, installing in /usr/local
> > predates /opt by many years.  Before /opt, vendors always used
> > /usr/local, or worse they installed in /bin and /usr/bin.
> 
> Oh, I agree that installing things in /usr/local predates /opt by
> years. I'm curious as to what vendor provided software installed
> itself in /usr/local, though, as I've never seen any.

I know that as recent as 3=4 years ago, Purify installed itself by
default in /usr/local, on SunOS and Solaris.  Lucid did this as well,
although things start getting pretty fuzzy going back that far. :)

> > > Then again, your quoting of "packages" points up something else - I
> > > never saw prepackaged binaries for v6 or v7.
> > I did on SysIII.  As a matter of fact, the entire distribution was
> > bundled into separate packets (all of them installed in /usr). :(
> 
> SysIII was not something I ever worked with. I went from v7 to BSD
> until, and stayed pretty much BSD until I started working with Solaris
> in the early/mid 90s.

I ran mostly DEC boxes until the early 90s, which had all software
installed in /usr/bin or /usr/local/bin.

> > In any case, I think you're wasting your time trying to convince folks
> > here.  It appears to me that this is an argument going nowhere, and the
> > claims you're making of history and tradition are way off the mark, thus
> > making the arguments have much less weight.
> 
> I few this as consciousness-raising. That's an ongoing process.
> 
> My claims about "history" and "tradition" are attempts to refute
> Brandon's assertion that packages going into /usr/local has "years of
> tradition behind it." Mostly, it's about what *packages* are, not what
> /usr/local was used for.

I disagree.

> By your own admission, /usr/local wasn't used on v7. So the discussion
> should turn to when BSD started seeing prebuilt vendor packages to
> install in /usr/local.

Late '80s on DEC boxes running Ultrix (which one could argue is one of
the earliest commercial 'vendor' BSD unices).  I don't consider Solaris
a BSD unix, so it using /opt isn't a valid point, which makes the whole
concept of '/opt' for BSD packages a moot point. :)

Probably the same time-frame for SunOS, although I didn't have
experience with it until the early 90's.  However, if necessary, I can
try and dig out installation docs for some software which ask to have
the stuff unpacked in /usr/local.



Nate


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?14900.19591.200496.869754>