From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Sep 8 15:43:06 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id PAA11210 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 8 Sep 1997 15:43:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usr09.primenet.com (tlambert@usr09.primenet.com [206.165.6.209]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11204 for ; Mon, 8 Sep 1997 15:43:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr09.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA16151; Mon, 8 Sep 1997 15:42:55 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199709082242.PAA16151@usr09.primenet.com> Subject: Re: what do you think ... should/could ports move to -> /usr/local/ports ? To: brandon@roguetrader.com (Brandon Gillespie) Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 22:42:52 +0000 (GMT) Cc: jbryant@tfs.net, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: from "Brandon Gillespie" at Sep 8, 97 03:50:21 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > I guess basically what i'm getting at is that to place these > in a filesystem off root, we shouldn't use an existing name, as then > people would assume the rest follows existing conventions (i.e. /opt) > which would not be the case, thus a different name would be in order, and > the first thing to pop into my head was simply /local :) [ ... ] > perhaps /pkg > > (preferred over /ports) > > This is probably a moot discussion tho, it implies too many changes to > very common but not official ''standards''... The biggest issue is not changes; changes are OK (IMO, anyway). What is upsetting is: 1) unless /whatever is a seperate partition, you are loading onto / instead of /usr, and /usr is probably where you want the loads to occur in that case. / is a small partition, traditionally. 2) If /opt is used, there is an ABI problem with installation of third party packaged wor SunOS/Solaris on FreeBSD boxes as part of an install into a SunOS/Solaris ABI environment; speficially, how do you tell /opt/cc for /opt/cc? I personally would prefer a mounting under /usr/opt, or /var/opt, if necessary, and let the "no inferior mounts of inferior mounts" purists do the fstab and symlink hacking themselves (to be purists they have to know enough about the actual layout that it's offensive to them; the same knowledge may be applied by them to fix their lcoal configuration). Worst case, it's another install option which asks "/usr/opt on a sperate partition?" and "/usr/opt really /opt?" if they say "yes". Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.