From owner-freebsd-ports  Thu Oct 24 05:13:21 1996
Return-Path: owner-ports
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA17359
          for ports-outgoing; Thu, 24 Oct 1996 05:13:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id FAA17354
          for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Thu, 24 Oct 1996 05:13:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.7.6/8.6.9) with ESMTP id FAA13362; Thu, 24 Oct 1996 05:12:58 -0700 (PDT)
To: erb@inss1.etec.uni-karlsruhe.de
cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: FreeBSD pkg system vs Debian dpkg 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 24 Oct 1996 10:49:27 +0200."
             <199610240849.KAA26783@insl2.etec.uni-karlsruhe.de> 
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 05:12:58 -0700
Message-ID: <13360.846159178@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-ports@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> Hm, what about the point with mixing non-ports stuff and ports under
> /usr/local? Does the design address it?

The packages section doesn't know a port from a non-port; just stuff
that goes into a given directory hierarchy.  The idea is to also merge
the idea of distributions, packaged ports and 3rd party packages into
one global idea of "packages" for which a generic set of tools exist.

					Jordan