Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 15:02:28 +0200 From: "Andrew V. Stesin" <stesin@elvisti.kiev.ua> To: hackers@freebsd.org Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Thoughts on ports&packages policies and FS layout (was: Re: More nits) Message-ID: <199511281302.PAA09617@office.elvisti.kiev.ua>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello Peter da Silva,
: > How do you handle namespace collisions? I would agree with this
: > iff the utilities were installed somewhere outside of the standard
: > PATH (i.e. in /usr/gnu/bin).
: If they're installed from packages they'd be in /usr/local/bin.
: I personally like having a /usr/gnu/bin myself.
I vote for "/usr/gnu/bin" for the stuff from FSF which
didn't come in a base distribution, too.
: > My biggest complaint with the ports stuff right now is the way it
: > scribbles all over /usr/local. Even worse, it isn't consistent (e.g.
: > binaries installed in /usr/bin and support stuff under /usr/local/lib).
: > /usr/local should be HANDS OFF to the vendor-supplied software, something
: > I consider "ports" to be.
Seems to be a reasonable observation. It really may be annoying.
Suppose a (very realistic!) scenario: I'm installing a binary package,
it sits itself down in /usr/local/*. But I'm _not_ satisfied with it and
want to do some research and more experiments myself; I go get a
"port" stuff (I mean the Makefile + patch-* things) as a starting
point, and do some mine own experimental changes. Then what?
`make install`, and the original binary package gets crippled. Bad.
Or shall I create /usr/_My_local,really!/* to distinguish between
what bits came from FreeBSD porters team and what are from me myself?
:-)
: > The ports software should be configured to install into either the
: > standard directory tree, or into a seperate /usr/ports hierarchy.
: I'd buy that. I like organizing things that way myself. But it's certainly
: not what I'd call a super-high priority.
a) It seems to me that this "two-faced" approach will fail
totally due to a bunch of hard-compiled pathnames in many tools.
b) I disagree with your last point about priorities --
the change itself is simple,
it's a good time for it ('cause a release just went out recently,
there's plenty of time to do it), and it will _really_ make
life simplier for me, mr. Andrew Avg. User -- I'll be able
to switch between mine and ported bits more easily and the
default location of my local stuff will be mine back.
Wouldn't Mr. Asami mind considering a change of a default port
subtree $PREFIX, leaving /usr/local back to me? :-)
--
With best regards -- Andrew Stesin.
+380 (44) 2760188 +380 (44) 2713457 +380 (44) 2713560
An undocumented feature is a coding error.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199511281302.PAA09617>