From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 15 10:35:22 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CA1C106564A for ; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 10:35:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pcthegreat@gmail.com) Received: from mail-gx0-f182.google.com (mail-gx0-f182.google.com [209.85.161.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49F638FC08 for ; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 10:35:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ggnk3 with SMTP id k3so10282781ggn.13 for ; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 02:35:21 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:cc :content-type; bh=HT2tVcHOR6+UNfSl6r+j5hw4Nxge5Sz9+3z+aFUq21M=; b=SXLwsWw5xyGOKzMQ7+E09sb8IMFM6qZ9I05ZX9s0yLRX3gqOLHW7raP6hBx4Pe0hL1 choXWhhLF4LnJBD1FzmKBVV1oObFFil9D1fO8Y6WzbBgqralcepIbpTyI2PX86QuSds4 U3ZEjZt7jy4+aIFJM9EgJMvl0n8sVuLSi+rx0= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.68.38.169 with SMTP id h9mt71183409pbk.113.1321351561362; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 02:06:01 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.68.44.65 with HTTP; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 02:06:01 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4ec21d02.DIq3JznJ4WBtwCd7%perryh@pluto.rain.com> References: <20111110123919.GF2164@hoeg.nl> <4EBC4B6E.4060607@FreeBSD.org> <20111111112821.GP2164@hoeg.nl> <4EBDC06F.6020907@FreeBSD.org> <20111112103918.GV2164@hoeg.nl> <4EBF0003.3060401@FreeBSD.org> <20111113091940.GX2164@hoeg.nl> <4EC04B65.4030801@FreeBSD.org> <20111114092922.GA2164@hoeg.nl> <20111114172609.1c2aeb0a@davenulle.org> <4ec21d02.DIq3JznJ4WBtwCd7%perryh@pluto.rain.com> Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 14:06:01 +0400 Message-ID: From: selven Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: ed@80386.nl, patfbsd@davenulle.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The strangeness called `sbin' X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 10:35:22 -0000 It does makes sense, but over the years people have gotten used to it, wrote scripts that assumed certain things to be in /sbin while some to be at /bin .. wouldn't the mere action of discussing about whether we should do it some other way when it the gain is not the great be called as bike shedding? On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 12:04 PM, wrote: > Patrick Lamaiziere wrote: > > > I would like to keep /usr/local for ports only. > > When things are going wrong with ports it is sometimes > > easier to rm -rf /usr/local and rebuild all from scratch. > > When using this approach -- which I agree makes sense -- > where should one put truly local (non-ports) executables > (/usr/local/bin and /usr/local/sbin being reserved for > ports executables)? > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > -- *Pirabarlen Cheenaramen *| $3|v3n* * /*memory is like prison*/ (user==selven)?free(user):user=malloc(sizeof(brain)); P Save electricity & disk space. Cat this mail to >/dev/null 2>&1 after use.