Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2021 14:32:05 +0200 From: Willem Jan Withagen via freebsd-current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> To: Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org>, Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD CURRENT <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: PATH: /usr/local before or after /usr ? Message-ID: <965c2a61-3499-4bdd-c72e-7bcaf4abd2d2@digiware.nl> In-Reply-To: <662dbcebb38135deb1599cd9d8fee3e133330409.camel@freebsd.org> References: <CAOtMX2g3G0nFCXGoWo14d1iwOisBUBAom6=v_gTHfJOoT3mJdw@mail.gmail.com> <662dbcebb38135deb1599cd9d8fee3e133330409.camel@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 16-7-2021 18:46, Ian Lepore wrote: > On Fri, 2021-07-16 at 09:01 -0600, Alan Somers wrote: >> FreeBSD has always placed /usr/local/X after /usr/X in the default PATH. >> AFAICT that convention began with SVN revision 37 "Initial import of 386BSD >> 0.1 othersrc/etc". Why is that? It would make sense to me that >> /usr/local/X should come first. That way programs installed from ports can >> override FreeBSD's defaults. Is there a good reason for this convention, >> or is it just inertia? >> -Alan > I have a hierarchy on my machines rooted at /local and /local/bin is > before /bin and /usr/bin in my PATH, so I can override system tools > when I explicitly want to without suffering any problems of an > unexpected override from installing a port or package. > > If you're using ports as a development environment to work on a new > gstat replacement, you could do something similar and put PREFIX=/local > in your port makefile while you're developing on it. +1 Cannot recall running into any issues over a long time. I'm only annoyed by having to fix access to installed ports when this reorder is not done... Perhaps just don't do this for root? --WjW
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?965c2a61-3499-4bdd-c72e-7bcaf4abd2d2>