Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 09:08:45 -0600 (MDT) From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> Cc: Jason Thorpe <thorpej@nas.nasa.gov>, Julian Elischer <julian@current1.whistle.com>, GNATS Management <gnats@freefall.freebsd.org>, freebsd-bugs@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: bin/1643: Support for NetBSD in bsd.port.mk Message-ID: <199609191508.JAA18029@rocky.mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <13644.843122081@time.cdrom.com> References: <199609190558.WAA27939@lestat.nas.nasa.gov> <13644.843122081@time.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jordan K. Hubbard writes: > > Well, kinda hoping for a unified "ports" collection (_I_ certainly prefer > > the name "opt", as do the NetBSD folks I've asked so far... :-) > > I'm not sure I do. /opt and /usr/opt have very definite Sun-ish > connotations for me, given that Sun was the first I knew to use that > organizational hierarchy, and they used it for something rather > different than /usr/ports (similar, but still different). I agree. /opt on a SUN is anything but optional. All of the OS patches are installed there, and *all* Sun provided software is installed there. As I understand it, they use /opt simply because it made using *their* package tools easier, but it by no means implies 'optional' software. When I first installed Solaris 2.3 I went with the defaults for the size of /opt. What a mistake that was since even before 2.4 was released /opt was full of Sun provided 'patches' and binaries. Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199609191508.JAA18029>