Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:24:57 +0000 From: Alan Clegg <abc@bsdi.com> To: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: People running with LOCALBASE set to something other than /usr/local? Message-ID: <20000823152456.F398@diskfarm.firehouse.net> In-Reply-To: <20000823074637.A42348@dragon.nuxi.com>; from obrien@FreeBSD.ORG on Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 07:46:37AM -0700 References: <14754.2222.927759.462718@guru.mired.org> <20000822084309.D38787@hamlet.nectar.com> <14755.26839.743103.399203@guru.mired.org> <20000823065243.A43477@hamlet.nectar.com> <39A3C568.32E686EC@dante.org.uk> <20000823074637.A42348@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Out of the ether, David O'Brien spewed forth the following bitstream:
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 01:36:56PM +0100, Konstantin Chuguev wrote:
> > Do you use /usr/local for anything?
> Yes, local stuff. IMHO, the Ports Collection using /usr/local was the
> biggest mistake of it. The ports collection should have used /usr/pkg/
> as NetBSD does. I have to create /usr/truely-local on my FreeBSD
> machines.
Amen. I would strongly recommend that the "/usr/local" use of ports be
re-aimed at something else. "/usr/local" should be the pristine ownership
of the LOCAL admin.
AlanC {BSD/OS uses /usr/contrib, but that ain't the same thing}
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?20000823152456.F398>